Do Technical Founders Need Business Co-Founders?

What type of background are you looking for in a co-founder?

Doctor for medical software sounds like a technical founder to me, even if they don't code. I think in this case, a doctor learning to code is easier than coders learning medicine.

I think an interesting follow-up conversation is about separating or sharing responsibility with co-founders. A technical founder with a non-technical founder can do well to reduce internal strife with clear responsibilities.

I think a better question to ask as a technical founder is will I effectively accomplish the necessary roles of a business co-founder. If not, why not focus on your core-competency and partner with someone who has that interest, background and ability. I also don't agree with Dalton that every technical cofounder is qualified to do theses tasks, that has not been my experience. Just because something can be learned more easily doesn't mean that someone will be able perform well at a new role. If this were the case there would be no need for sales managers.

From a technical founder to any despairing MBAs: you can still serve as a technical founder by leaning into your (non-professional) interests for inspiration. Don’t give up.

As an entrepreneur who is still a one-man-army that will launch this summer, the non-technical stuff is sometimes a godsend. Taking a day off to work on the business plan or write copy has recharged my batteries and kept me going on the heads-down technical aspects.

The simple answer is YC rarely backs solo founders, the team should have breadth, operator and technical, you’re good to go. Any technical founder may think code is the most important thing, but ultimately if you’re in a winner takes all market, it becomes scale of operation that will assure victory

Thank you so much guys for responding and making this video. I truly appreciate it. As a tech founder myself, I started by building the MVP and talking to potential customers but things have quickly started to get out of control and I found myself having to learn many (many) new skills. In my particular case, founding a co-founder who is now the CEO has been the right choice. I can focus on product development (which is a full-time job) while my co-founder deals with non-technical affairs. Of course, your mileage may vary.

You need someone who has the skill set to be great at the outward-facing tasks - fundraising, sales, talking to users. Being okay at those tasks vs. excelling at them can make a big difference. Some technical founders can do it/learn it while others struggle. But an A+ player in those areas is hugely valuable regardless of whether they’re technical.

I think I could enjoy watching Dalton and Michael talk about anything.

As a Saas founder I've learnt a lot from listening to this channel videos when Michael and Dallton have this important conversations.

"If your start-up is focused on B2B sales, you most likely won't need a business founder. However, if your start-up is focused on B2C sales, you will definitely need a business founder. It's worth noting that every start-up example that didn't require a business founder was created during the infant stage of the internet."

I am a technical cofounder and did my bachelor's in computer science, and I love these videos but I kinda disagree with their obsession of technical cofounders

Technical founders may or may not need a business co-founder. But definitely the business skills. Else the world would haven't witnessed Google, FB or Microsoft.

I think the key is the definition of a “technical co founder” I have an electrical Eng background but would consider myself “non technical” (not a coder. As went into growth marketing (getting customers). I believe the quality of the “business confounder” make a huge difference.

I love these talks. So very true and real.

I feel the question is more "Do you need a Sales / Marketing / Business Co-Founder" or do you need employees who take ownership, that can cover that? Of course, being able to hire people would mean that you've already made some money or already landed funding. The problem with co-founders is that you don't always have the same values. And being married to someone you have questionable compatibility with, "just because you need a co-founder" can be problematic. There's also another question of what kind of thinking is required to understand your market... And whether the Tech-Founder is suited to getting it.

I needed this exact answer in this exact moment. Thank you!

Here is a summary of the key points from the document: The document is a transcript of a video discussing whether startups need a business co-founder. The main points are: Startups have many tasks that need to get done that don't require coding, like legal/administrative work, talking to customers, hiring, sales, fundraising, etc. These are "smart generalist tasks" that either a technical or non-technical founder could potentially take ownership of. The key is having someone on the founding team who has the appetite and vigor to adopt these business-related tasks, not just the ability to do them. Many hugely successful companies like Google, Nvidia, Microsoft, Facebook had technical co-founders only. So a business co-founder is not an absolute necessity. However, sometimes industry expertise can be helpful - e.g. if you're selling to lawyers, having a lawyer co-founder who understands that industry. When investors advise startups to get a business co-founder, often they're giving polite feedback that the founding team lacks appetite or skills in some area. But the founders could develop those themselves. The most important reason to have a co-founder is emotional support through the difficult startup journey - not because one person uniquely fills a business skill gap.

Valuable as always. For Institutional and B2B markets ideally sales experience is required and thats what typically business people bring. For us it boils down to time reduced for incremental sales, contract value and expedited activation. If the unit is consumer, undifferentiated with data points and no barriers to access, the specialist business founder is unlikely to make sense.Thats Google, Facebook and Microsoft.