4 ms·
STOP. Just go work for someone else, please! Pretty please! Find someone with vision, and work for/with him/her instead. Or merge as equal partners. You sound
by nnq 9y ago
STOP. Just go work for someone else, please! Pretty please! Find someone with vision, and work for/with him/her instead. Or merge as equal partners.
You sound like really competent people, but working under people without their own vision and without their own ideas is a wrist slashing inducing experience... The people with the ideas/vision should be in charge, not ever the other way around! If you're execution people, find some "idea/vision people" and merge (like in 100% equal partners) with them and make you team whole.
Nobody wants more "execution people" in charge. If it's not vision/ideas what drives something... it's not worth doing it! we're all better without it! I'd work anytime under/with and asshole with good vision/ideas than another "executionist optimizer" that makes everyone's life hell trying to optimize profit and efficiency when nobody wants more optimizing. People want meaning from their leaders and managers, and this can only come from vision/ideas.
Go head hunt for "you team's Steve Jobs", not for "ideas". You want the "idea generator" and you want yo put him/her half-in-charge...
- Jean-Philipe 9y agoI so disagree. I've met so many "people with vision" who were far off with reality and ultimately failed miserably. Most successful startups I know, including my own, have pivoted - i.e. they had the wrong vision to begin with and figured out something else along the way. The team was what made them succeed.
- babaganoosh89 9y agoUsually you want someone who’s also a domain expert and knows the market inside and out. More than just a vision that hasn’t been market tested.
- TrickyRick 9y agoSo a domain expert with vision. What would he need this team for apart from maybe their money, which out of the three is probably the easiest to acquire?
- mooreds 9y agoA team that can execute is worth something too. The original comment stated (correctly in my opinion) that you want the person with vision to be in charge. But a domain expert with vision may or may not be able to execute against that vision effectively. If they are for real they'll have started, even if it just a manual process or horrible looking MVP. But if this team got together with someone with vision (and were able to check their egos at the door, not a small ask) they could really execute against that vision and bring a great product to market.
- jacquesm 9y agoAnd who knows how to run a business. Sadly, it is quite often the case that those at the helm of start-ups are absolutely clueless about what it takes to run an actual business. This makes everything look fine and peachy until the VC money runs out.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- colordrops 9y agoMost startups fail. Even if the likely outcome is failure, it's still better to have someone with a vision at the helm even if it's the wrong vision. You'll never find the shore if the boat doesn't move.
- a13n 9y agoI can't agree. Sure, founders need to have vision, but they also need to be "execution people". You think they should just raise money and outsource all the hard work to their reports? Gross.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- dkersten 9y agoThis went a different direction than I was expecting from the first paragraph. I thought it would go in the direction of "work for somebody else, so you can learn the problems/inefficiencies/pain points in their area and then build a startup fixing those".
- teckays 9y agoIt all depends on the terms both parties agree on!