As psychologists say, people often talk not to other people but to their projections they hang on others.

At the center of the default-systems of the founders' brains at different stages are different primary benchmarks.

For some of them, the persuasion that the main thing in a start-up is the idea itself never transforms into the understanding that this idea should meet the requirements of reality.

The fact that money itself is an opportunity for implementing the idea and rapid business growth is often overlooked.

It also happens that the role of an investor is not only devalued but also appears “demonic.”

We encounter the same devaluation of the role of technical implementation. But we have also seen many sad endings to such startups.

If a feeling of devaluation arises, which is annoying, then this feeling is a marker that you need to decide whether you are ready to enter into a “tug-of-war” relationship at all.

And will there be any financial success for such founders?

But who knows, maybe their mission is simply to improve the world?

Perhaps we are also wrong with our orientation towards financial success and technical solutions?

As old as time itself, and again compromises are required for the sake of progress.

Although everyone has the right to refuse if the case is particularly egregious.

Take care. :)

The absolute truth. 😂 To defend the IT crowd: they genuinely don’t know how. The most engineers do is justify the project’s technical-economic efficiency. That’s what you can count on.

However, there’s also the opposite effect, which harms the shared goal: when developers fancy themselves as business pros and, without consulting anyone, do things that don’t align with business reality, wasting project resources.

Managing developers’ wild approach to business involves creating a conceptual bridge between business goals and technical solutions. The engineer will gather all your requirements and business plan specifics, highlight key contexts, and turn them into tools and strategies. (And will regularly crack the whip to monitor progress.)

As for startup founders – it’s still business. We personally wish they’d be realistic about funding. And if they “just don’t know how either,” they should admit it and pay specialists instead of expecting someone to solve their problem as a bonus.

A familiar thing, dear investor. We're in the same boat. ;) "You just have to do it. It's a simple task, why does it cost so much?"

Our engineering efforts guide startups past a huge graveyard of failed projects and sunk investments. You wouldn't believe how huge this graveyard is.

But that's the way it should be, isn't it? Why value partnership with engineers and by the way, why are IT specialists so expensive? 😂 Despite the fact that we saved them money through our strategies, which allow us to never say "no, it's technically impossible" or stop a project because it can't withstand new changes.

However, if founders already have a history of failure or experience bringing products to market, they are able to compare alternatives and make evaluations. It's a pity there aren't many founders like that. 🙂