
Developer CEO vs Sales Guy CEO - jusben1369
http://jmlite.tumblr.com/post/38548502524/developer-ceo-vs-sales-guy-ceo
======
timr
I've been trying to figure out why this piece sticks in my craw.

I am, for all intents and purposes, Developer Guy. I'm analytical. I write
code. I solve problems, often with math. I've been "this way" my whole life.
I've also been in many tens of thousands of conversations, with all kinds of
people. Yet, despite having been in many conversations about everything and
nothing at all, I've _never_ been tempted to question my conversational
partner's ability to reason analytically based on their decision to ask non-
technical questions:

\- If we talk about the weather, I assume we're making small talk.

\- If we talk about family and friends, I assume that they want to talk about
something with greater personal meaning.

\- If we talk about their vintage peruvian bottle cap collection, I assume
that they _really like_ peruvian bottle caps.

Likewise, when someone comes up to me and asks me some very intense technical
question, I _don't assume_ that they aren't also evaluating my tone, posture,
volume, poise, choice of words, etc. We're all human. It's all part of the
game.

Sales Guy seems puzzled that Developer Guy isn't spending time on non-
technical issues. But how does he know that? Is he assuming that Developer Guy
doesn't care? Developer guy might just be _intensely interested_ in sales
guy's specific knowledge. It happens.

What strikes me about this writing is not that Developer Guy and Sales Guy are
different, but that Sales Guy is reconciling a stereotype of Developer Guy
with his actual experience. And that's bothersome.

~~~
orangethirty
_I've been trying to figure out why this piece sticks in my craw._

Because it makes the _Sales CEO_ (whatever the fuck that means) sound like a
Douche CEO. If he can stereotype people from a conversation, I can surely
stereotype him from a blog post. Though that also makes me a Douche CEO...

In all seriousness, stop labeling people. Treat them as human beings. See the
person behind the title. Most of the time, you will find someone who is
geniunely smart, but absolutely has no fucking idea about what he/she is doing
(like the rest of the world). Be it a sales person, a developer, a mechanic,
nurse, lawyer, or a janitor. Human beings.

------
miahi
Developer CEO thinking = "How do I make this work?"

Sales CEO thinking = "How do I get his money?"

For many tech people, the product is the goal - getting some techie thing
going. The other things (like: funding, getting some type of customer) are
just tasks that have to be done but they don't really know or care about.
Between them, the tech people are quite open (as the tech culture is based on
Internet and open source) so any kind of question is fine - and when they find
somebody that knows how to do the "other tasks" they try to get into details,
as they don't have them.

For many sales people, the customer is the goal - attracting the customer to
get his money. The other things (like: product/tech) are just tasks that have
to be done but are done by someone else. Usually sales people are not talking
shop (customers) between them, even if they work at the same company, so every
time you ask them something they immediately wonder why did you ask that
question, what is your hidden purpose and how they can benefit from it.

~~~
SatvikBeri
I would actually break successful CEOs into Developer CEO, Product CEO, and
Sales CEO.

The Sales CEO tries to figure out what problems people have, and convince them
that his company/product can solve those problems.

The Product CEO takes the hundreds of problems that exist in the market and
come up with a product that solves a decent subset of those problems.

The Developer CEO figures out how to actually build such a product. They're
responsible for solving hard technical problems and pushing the limits of
what's possible.

(There is also a lot of overlap-a good CEO is usually an extreme generalist)

~~~
temac
This is a good description of sales people, product people and developer
people, but how does it relates to CEOs?

~~~
SatvikBeri
Every successful founder-CEO I know of is a generalist who's especially good
at one of these 3, and their cofounders or early hires make up for their
weaknesses in the other two areas.

That said, at large companies the dynamic is different. I know of one
excellent CEO at a 5000 person company who spent almost no time on product,
market, or operations. Instead, he spent all his time on the human element.
Making sure that there were strong training programs, making sure that it was
easy to transfer from one department to another (and instituting policies that
managers _had_ to transfer star employees every two years or less), cutting
through a lot of bureaucracy to make sure that star players could get promoted
commensurate to their talents, etc. The company's performance and stock price
skyrocketed during his tenure, and he was considered one of the best CEOs the
company ever had.

------
timr
_"I, on the other hand, find myself answering questions and wondering 'That’s
a great question. I wonder why he asked that question?....Whereas he based the
value of the meeting on the quality of the data I focus on how much I think I
got an accurate snapshot of how the person thinks and operates....It did make
me wonder if the best leaders are capable of doing both."_

Yes, they are.

Dear, "Sales Guy CEO": if you again find yourself in the situation where
you're in a conversation with a deeply analytical person, it's probably in
your best interest _not_ to assume that your conversation partner is socially
clueless just because she is asking good, specific, actionable questions. If
they're smart enough to ask good questions, it probably means they're smart
enough to read your reactions and personality, as well. You don't corner the
market on that particular skill.

Honestly...this is why "sales guys" get a reputation for arrogance amongst
nerds. People who grew up as social outcasts are often _keenly aware_ of the
social dynamics of the world around them.

~~~
dmor
I didn't get the impression from the tone of this post that there was anything
adversarial about their meeting, that the OP was saying he was better at
social skills than the technical CEO, or that the OP was even judging his
companion's approach, so much as observing differences and trying to learn
something from them.

Your comment "you don't corner the market in this particular skill" is the
most interesting part, it sounds like you are irritated that the assumption
that technical and analytical people are somehow less sensitive but then your
comment exhibits exactly the lack of understanding and immediate condescension
which earns this perception. I doubt you intended it, but it's something to
think about.

~~~
timr
_"it sounds like you are irritated that the assumption that technical and
analytical people are somehow less sensitive but then your comment exhibits
exactly the lack of understanding and immediate condescension which earns this
perception. I doubt you intended it, but it's something to think about."_

Well, that's a fine _ad hominem_ , but it doesn't address what I wrote. I'm
clearly irritated by the post; that's not a mystery. But to argue that I'm
being _patronizing_ , you have to ignore what I'm actually saying: we all have
innate social skills, and that the author starts from the opposite premise.
He's trying to figure out why this "developer CEO" is so _different_ , when
the difference appears to be trivial (one person is asking analytical
questions).

The original post was clearly phrased in an adversarial manner:

 _"Sales Guy"_ vs _"Developer Guy"_

 _"I, on the other hand..."_

 _"Whereas he based the value of the meeting..."_

 _"Where he took my generalized questions and drove them to specific topics -
that was the interesting part. That let me know what’s on his mind."_

Plus, there was the hint of a "gotcha" tone:

 _"That will give me the context for assessing future activities by his
company."_

Basically, he's starting from the premise that this other person is somehow
_not_ making these social judgments; that they're _not_ building a mental
model of how their conversational partner operates. That's wrong, and it's
(IMO) arrogant: his thinking rests upon the implicit assumption of The Other
as a stranger. Not everyone makes this assumption -- many (if not most) people
will start from an assumption of similarity on matters of human nature.

~~~
nwienert
Actually think dmor nailed it, and your counter-examples here are just you
putting them in your own context. I didn't pick up any of those innuendos at
all.

~~~
ditonal
I disagree, I think timr is correct, and despite him being criticized for poor
socialization, he is in fact picking up the subtle but obvious social and
language cues that you and dmor either fail to notice or choose to ignore.

This is clearly a compare and contrast piece. He is contrasting what he took
from the meeting with what the Developer CEO took from the meeting, with a
heavy implication that those benefits were exclusive to each other. He says it
more or less explicitly:

"I suspect in his mind the benefit of meeting was directly related to his
perception of the quality of data in my answers."

Also look at the language construct used:

"Whereas he based the value of the meeting on the quality of the data I focus
on how much I think I got an accurate snapshot of how the person thinks and
operates."

The google definition of 'whereas' is "In contrast or comparison with the fact
that.".

To possibly overthink social cues, I think that timr wrote a true but slightly
condescending response to a slightly condescending article. Since engineers
commonly are condescending to sales people, and since HN is filled with
contrarians, someone felt obligated to stick up for the sales guy.

~~~
oscargrouch
>since HN is filled with contrarians, someone felt obligated >to stick up for
the sales guy haha.. nice touch but going back to the article, look like a
description from a meeting with a alien creature from another planet, and a
sociological perspective of the meeting with this new race coming to the town
of the bosses.. The Nerd Ceo

Is natural that the old school yuppie feel threatened by this new specie of
ceo.. this new species are the one who will replace them in a near future..

Of course the tech ceo will need to suck the knowledge from the generation
that were in the battle front.. thats his nature.. he is a hacker, he learn
fast, he thinks fast..

this is not just about different points of view.. this is a generational
clash.. two different generations meeting each other while they are all in the
game..

this is the dawn of the salesman, and the rise of the geeks of course they are
all afraid, they should be :)

~~~
soup10
Usually a large part of a ceo's job is human interaction. While it's not
strictly necessary to have strong social skills to be a CEO, it sure is
helpful.

------
thetrumanshow
Interesting, and perhaps related, is the tendency of people who aren't
socially inclined (and tend not to enjoy small-talk) to employ the ask-a-
million questions technique. This is how many-an-engineer can muscle through
the most awkward social interactions with ease. The upsides of this approach
are: 1) you will seem genuinely interested and come across as personable, and
2) you get to learn new things.

~~~
qeorge
Tip: if you're like me and not great at small-talk and so you find yourself
falling into the ask-a-million-questions trap, try this.

Follow your mundane questions with a form of "do you like it?". It will
usually break the conversation right out of 20-questions mode.

Example:

    
    
        A: What is your major?
        B: English
        A: Do you like it?
        B: Well, yes, but what most people don't understand about English majors is...
    

I picked this up on Reddit, and it really works. Give it a try!

~~~
nostrademons
That helps, but what a socially-adept person is usually looking for is for you
to make a statement that relates their answer back to yourself and then gives
them an opportunity to follow up:

    
    
      A: What is your major?
      B: English
      A: Oh, cool, I took an English course in college.  Probably nowhere near as detailed
       as your studies, but I enjoyed it.
      B: Oh?  Which course?
      A: Science fiction.
      B: Never took that one.  Which books did you read?
      A: A bunch of Heinlein, some Ursula LeGuin.
      B: I never liked Heinlein - thought he was a sexist pig.  I love LeGuin though.
    

The problem with asking a lot of questions is that there's unequal emotional
investment between a question and an answer: the answerer is putting
themselves out there a lot more than the questioner. (This is one reason why
he who asks the questions controls the conversation.) If you're trying to
build a relationship, this feels very awkward. Instead, the point of most
conversations is to find & build a connection between the two people, one that
lets both of them feel safe simply volunteering information and knowing that
the other person is interested. By relating topics back to yourself, you a.)
give both parties a chance to ask questions, and b.) show that you're in the
same boat as them, and so they can feel free to open up to you.

Notice that conversations between close friends rarely have questions - they
consist of people taking turns volunteering new information, often rather
animatedly if they have good rapport with each other. Also look at Hacker News
comment threads: people rarely ask direct questions, they just contribute
additional information along the same lines as the original comment.

~~~
ako
I think it's really rude to pretend interest in another person by asking
questions, and then to start talking about yourself as soon as you can...

------
saosebastiao
It is awesome that a Sales Guy CEO can be this perceptive and open minded. It
is hard enough to find a Sales Guy CEO that isn't openly condescending to
technical people...let alone one that listens to them instead of barking
commands.

~~~
adrianhoward
... and of course the Sales guys have the opposite experience with Dev CEOs
;-)

------
bravura
He's taking a systematic approach to de-risking areas of the business that he
doesn't feel comfortable with.

This is the same thing you do when you jump into a large code-base.

He's resisting the temptation to use sales skill on _himself_. Being able to
create a reality distortion field is a useful skill for a CEO, but this skill
shouldn't be trained on yourself.

When someone asks you a question you don't know the answer to (about your
market, etc.), take note! Don't be that guy who just says: "Stupid investor.
He doesn't get it." and ignores the question. Give the smartest reply you
have, but let your lack of knowledge become a weakly held hypothesis. Then,
attempt to validate or controvert this hypothesis.

In short, as a CEO, don't sell yourself too much. It blindsides you against
what you should be learning.

------
keeptrying
The developer CEO is trying to prove or disprove the model in his own head.

Whereas the Sale Guy CEO is trying to allow a model to form in his head.

I think you will learn more using the second method. But for a programmer to
accept the second view is very hard. It requires us to shut the eff up.

~~~
nostrademons
Which one are you doing with your comment? ;-)

I didn't get that impression - I got the impression that _both_ CEOs are
trying to form a model in their heads. But the developer CEO is building his
from the bottom up - he seeks information on the details, and then will let
general principles coalesce out of that data. The sales CEO is building his
from the top down - he wants to understand the gestalt of the conversation
first, and then he'll fill in the details later.

Computers teach us to pay attention to the details first, because they're very
unforgiving if we get them wrong, while people will often fill them in for us
if we provide a compelling-enough top-level vision. I find I thought much like
the sales CEO up through college, while I'm much more inclined now to trust my
intuition to produce a top-level picture once I've assembled a bunch of
disparate facts.

~~~
keeptrying
With a bottom up approach you are trying to prove or disprove the model in
your head. Or at least only slightly mold it.

There's no way to learn more than that because you've already fixed the
foundation. This is a good strategy when you've already been working on
something for a while and you have made some firm bets or if you've done this
thing before to some relative success.

The sales guys is usually going to be better if you really want to understand
a new customer from ground up.

Ie direction matters.

------
namank
Sales CEO: Ctrl+f "economoics" on your LinkedIn profile.

I think the difference is in your end goal. From the article, it seems that
the sales CEO is more interested in the person, hence questions about the flow
of conversation while the developer CEO seems interested in the product and
domains that have a structure associated with them.

------
nell
From my experience, the sales guys seem to recognize the importance of
engineering and product. It's we engineers who generally fail to see the value
of sales. I cite this blog and this HN thread as evidence.

------
kayoone
Having been a Developer CEO, for me the best setup would be a Product Guy CEO,
a Sales Guy CMO and a Developer Guy CTO. I want to focus on the tech, still
have a say in the product and marketing areas but at the end of the day i want
to build the thing from a technical perspective. YMMV

As the CEO there are just so many other things you have to take of, especially
in small businesses. I have done it and always felt its stealing my time from
coding and getting work done.

------
DiabloD3
I don't understand this article. I've reread it twice, and all I can glaen
from it is "sales guy CEO" doesn't know how to ask questions, or is not of the
analytical mindset.

Steve Jobs was the best salesman ever... but he was clearly of the analytical
mindset, and not a developer CEO. Steve Jobs knew how to ask all the right
questions.

I mean, yes, I know its unfair to compare people to Steve Jobs, but what am I
missing?

~~~
hahnfeld
Jobs was analytical? Brilliant, sure. But, perhaps more instinctual than
analytical. Witness the endless tales of him not asking for input, not
listening, not taking the advice of (undoubtedly analytical) others. Add
killer instinct & stubbornness and you have something entirely different than
either of the CEO's at breakfast.

------
anuraj
There are few generalists. A good CEO is somebody who understands his
limitations and keep his sides armed with best in breed personnel who are
better at tackling those limitations. A some what developer+product CEO here
:)

------
circa
not sure why but the title reminds me of www.thewebsiteisdown.com

~~~
MichaelApproved
I thought the same thing. I only recently found that series and I thought this
link could be to a new episode. I wonder if a link to that series would be
acceptable content on HN or would it be one of those things that should stay
on Reddit.

I'd say, since it was so popular and well done, there's room on HN for it but
I'm curious to hear what others think.

Edit: clickable link for those interested <http://www.thewebsiteisdown.com>

------
acchow
Vapid and hollow. An anecdote about one particular "developer" CEO's style
compared to one particular "Sales" CEO's style.

Thanks for wasting my time.

------
joonix
How does one without sales experience break into tech sales (b2b)?

~~~
carterschonwald
Talk with people. It's really just that simple!

I'm stumbling into picking up b2b skills myself. That said, I'm lucky that I
have a super technical biz where I'd only allow core engineers to be running
the b2b sales convo with customers.

~~~
nanijoe
As if b2b Customer actually involve Engineers in the decision making process

~~~
carterschonwald
Most businesses you are correct. My customers are not most businesses and
never will be! :-)

Having customers you're excited to help succeed can not be underestimated as a
valuable motivator. Most businesses aren't interesting to me, so I'm
incredibly lucky that I'm in a space with really cool businesses. :-)

