As a SPARK team we had eight people working together. All that effort made it easier for us to put on a good show and win the competition. But for a startup with no income, all those people cause a bit of difficulty. The standard advice is to found a company with two, maybe three people. If two, you’ve got the business side (customer development) and the product side. Our team ended up being heavy on product side, so on paper we’ve got one master networker with a large stake, and everyone else splitting the rest. While I understand that some people are prepared to put in grueling hours, does that translate to a fifteen-times interest? Perhaps there is a sort of exponential price of time commitment – certainly I’ve avoided going off the high end, both because of reduced performance, and the utter blackout of everything else.
In truth I don’t know what to even ask for. The process of doing this all up front seems strangely out of place in an environment that is otherwise gung-ho agile. There are of course some provision for changes – “four year vest with one year cliff” in startup jargon, but it only addresses departures, not variance of contribution.
The other related issue (which actually came up sooner) is the CTO (Chief Technology Officer) position. This would be the entire product side in a two person startup. The investors of course want a big name that’s done it before, but we are seriously considering bootstrapping (no investment) In the world of by-the-book startups (who’s book, anyway?) the CTO is a more-than-full-time position. In the SPARK team, developers were myself, and another who has some relevant experience, but is’t available even full time.
Probably, all it would have taken for me to be that person would have been to step forward and confidently say “I’m your man”. That moment, of course, has passed. The consequences of that decision would be staggering. No more martial arts, no more condo board, no more walks in the woods, no more user groups, no more personal projects. and no more idle distractions. I’d certainly have to move downtown, at least on a trail basis, which would mean finding a place, dispositioning all my stuff, moving, and probably hiring someone to rent out my property. It would be a kind of death and resurrection – I’d be sorely tempted to throw a wake for the person I was.
I’ve lived my life mostly taking things pretty easy, sometimes enjoying moments of total effort. Since this is all I’ve known it might have been interesting to try for a little while, but this could easily become a many-years marathon. Having lived my whole life with the philosophy that it’s about more than money, it would seem a shame to just give in at the first real challenge. (Of course creating something is about more than money, but it would be a very stressful time all the same.) The fact that I don’t have the experience the advisors want doesn’t embolden me either.