“Roy, I’m leaving”
“Wait, why. What do you mean?”
“I can’t find a cofounder.”
And we proceeded to laugh till tears roll…
This was a moment I shared with a founder at Entrepreneur First.
Wasn’t exactly sure why we ended up laughing. I guess it’s one of those moments where it became painfully funny till you had to laugh it off.
He had been working on an idea prior to joining EF. Truth is, it’s difficult to convince someone to work with you on equal terms, while you are being rigid on your idea.
Don’t Cycle Fast Alone
Some founders come on to EF fixated on an idea or something they’ve been working on for some time. If they are inattentive to their cofounder, it hardly ever works out.
As EF funds individuals pre-idea, most founders’ psyche going into EF are:
a) find something they can contribute,
b) is technically exciting for them, and
c) build the idea from scratch.
In most scenarios, the person with the insight or the idea tends to be the driver. It makes sense. You’re the domain expert, you understand the problem and you have the network. But if you’re not careful, you’ll end up managing your potential cofounder.
In practical terms, this could mean unloading an entire Google Drive worth of documents to let the other party read through. Subsequently, spending the next 1–2 days explaining why the problem exist and being rigid on the solution having to be “X”. All this while, you’re out making customer calls expecting the other party to have read through those documents.
If you find yourself being more concerned about whether your potential cofounder has the required skills to build what you want, bear in mind that the sentiment can be felt by the other party.
No one who has left their jobs to commit to starting a company will want to end up being managed to get a piece of work done.
They want to feel involved. They want to feel that this is equally theirs’. They want to be excited about solving this problem. Not told what to do.
Effectively, this enlarges the gap between the two co-founders.
Good Team Dynamics = Aerodynamics
At EF, we drill this saying into our founders: “productivity is traction for teams”.
If productivity is traction for teams, then you should be making more progress because you’re together. Not just being productive in isolation.
Think of it as if you’re in a pro-cycling race, if you will. You cycle in groups because it’s more aerodynamic. Collectively, this allows everyone to move faster by reducing drag.
When in this situation, a bad practice would be to try and cycle ahead even faster. Thinking that you now have a cofounder who is looking into building the solution, you push on. You take on more customer calls, understand the problem better and make headway into the industry. You then pass on all these learnings to your cofounder hoping they will understand it the way you do.
These are bad team dynamics. It doesn’t work! This wears you out faster.
Cycling farther ahead alone means having to combat what’s in front of you, while having to look behind to wait for your cofounder to catch up. You won’t get to the finishing line faster this way.
These gaps exist when you’re starting off at a position farther ahead than your cofounder:
a) knowledge on the Industry/domain specificity,
b) understanding of the problem, and
c) motivation in building the solution.
Close these gaps quickly.
Cycle Close
You should be optimizing for the collective rate of learning between the two co-founders. You get there by doing things that allow both founders to get on level terms quickly.
Good teams:
a) Align on motivations
b) Make it feel real
c) Problem solve together
For example, a founder had an idea in building a MedTech diagnostic tool. He had all network and insights in the space but needed a technical co-founder. Upon finding someone suitable, he spent a day educating him about the problem. Found out that the potential co-founder is excited about working on the technical solution. Once they officiate the founding team, he made it feel real by tapping onto all his network and took all calls with his co-founder.
While we’re only weeks into EF Hong Kong and the jury’s still out. It’s still painful to see someone who you want to see succeed, at their wit’s end.
Cycle close.
Thanks to the EF Team and EF cohorts for reading drafts of this. If you’re looking to cycle close — try here.
