A business partnership is like marriage
Paul Graham writes about startups, reviewing feedback he has received from those who went through his “School for Startups”. The most common feedback was about the need to be careful when choosing business partners.
What people wished they’d paid more attention to when choosing cofounders was character and commitment, not ability. This was particularly true with startups that failed. The lesson: don’t pick cofounders who will flake.
Here’s a typical reponse:
You haven’t seen someone’s true colors unless you’ve worked with them on a startup.
The reason character is so important is that it’s tested more severely than in most other situations. One founder said explicitly that the relationship between founders was more important than ability:
I would rather cofound a startup with a friend than a stranger with higher output. Startups are so hard and emotional that the bonds and emotional and social support that come with friendship outweigh the extra output lost.
We learned this lesson a long time ago. If you look at the YC application, there are more questions about the commitment and relationship of the founders than their ability.
Founders of successful startups talked less about choosing cofounders and more about how hard they worked to maintain their relationship.
One thing that surprised me is how the relationship of startup founders goes from a friendship to a marriage. My relationship with my cofounder went from just being friends to seeing each other all the time, fretting over the finances and cleaning up shit. And the startup was our baby. I summed it up once like this: “It’s like we’re married, but we’re not fucking.”
Several people used that word “married.” It’s a far more intense relationship than you usually see between coworkers—partly because the stresses are so much greater, and partly because at first the founders are the whole company. So this relationship has to be built of top quality materials and carefully maintained. It’s the basis of everything.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:45 am
I’ve always heard that it’s important for everyone to have a way out of a partnership. Recently, a seasoned businessman pointed out to me that this is a terrible idea. You don’t want partners being able to cut and run as soon as the going gets tough.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
Chris, I think that is true. The phrase “cut and run” suggests one person being able to walk away from the responsibilities and obligations of the business. I do think divorce should be taken into account when the partnership is first created – there ought to a process in place whereby one partner can leave if they want, but they face legal penalties if they try to duck some mutual obligations. That is, there should be a way out, but it shouldn’t be as easy as simply as walking away. If the other partner(s) want to continue with the business, their interests need to be protected from the partner who wants to leave.