3 ms·
No. Or at least, not always. IMO,a CTO is a combo between tech and product. They have a (fairly) good understanding of tech but they understand that tech is
by tagyro 4y ago
No.
Or at least, not always.
IMO,a CTO is a combo between tech and product.
They have a (fairly) good understanding of tech but they understand that tech is there to support the product.
I'm ok with a tech CTO and I'm also ok with a people-CTO, even a product-CTO or even (ok, hardly) a business-CTO, but let's not gate-keep the CTO role (and it's just a role!).
ps. yes, I know CTO means Chief Technical Officer - but if you really think about it, tech is there to support the product, so it's really un-productive to focus on the tech when it would be better to focus on the product.
ps2. let's stop with the very <b>confident</b> titles, IMO most of the time they're simply wrong (I'll dig in my history for more examples)
- 0x457 4y agoThe issue is that if you're not technical CTO in a tech company, that is you can replace a senior engineer[1], then absolutely no one will respect you. The CTO absolutely must be technical, not just because of respect, but also because other C-level execs need someone to explain simple things to them. If not, then you end up like Intel. [1]: not as in be CTO and do a workload of senior engineer, but rather "if you weren't a CTO, would you be hired as a senior?"