Solo Founding
Starting a company is one of the hardest things you can do professionally. Doing it solo as opposed to with cofounders might not change the outcome, but it definitely will change the journey.
Solo founding is surrounded by a bit of a myth in the startup scene. It is considered brave, foolish, hard-core, narcissistic, lonely and so many other conflicting things. I started three companies in the last six years, which is two more than I wish, and I wanted to share my experience on the co-founding journey vs the solo-founding journey.
I started both Mirage and Acapela in the most classical 50-50 cofounder equity split. You find a partner in crime, you divide areas of responsibility and you hit the road. This setup can work well, but there are a few things to look out for.
First, there should always be an agreement between the founders who can call the final shot when there is a deadlock in making an important decision. I would go even further and split the equity at least with one share difference to make that symbolic distinction. Cofounders overriding each other when making decisions should not happen often (weekly etc), but making decisive decisions quickly is the main competitive advantage of a startup and this helps to keep the decision momentum. One of the common causes for slow deaths for startups is having a CEO, who is slow to make decisions and communicate them clearly. Both as a cofounder and an employee, I would much prefer a strong-willed CEO, who makes decisions quickly and is willing to correct course when new data emerges.
Moving on to how to choose that one-in-a-million cofounder to get married with after a few months (hopefully) of cofounder dating? I have gone through plenty of cofounder conflicts and also had to part ways in the past which has taught me a few things about what not to do. Never compromise. If you have doubts about your cofounder, keep on looking. It’s very similar to a romantic relationship - it’s much better to be single than be with a not-so-great-fitting partner. By and large, I have learned to look for two key qualities in my cofounders. I need to admire them professionally in at least one area or in other words, they need to have a superpower in one skill set where I could not become so good even if I tried very hard. That keeps you on your toes and helps you appreciate your cofounder through the lows and highs. Starting to feel like you could do a better job than your cofounder in their role is a highway to a breakup. The second thing I look for in any potential cofounder now is wanting to spend time with them also in a non-work related setting. They do not need to be my best friends, but being able to laugh at stupid shit and go hiking or whatever together to release some steam is crucial to managing your relationships through the lows. Again, I would draw many parallels between a romantic relationship here, where being friends with your partner is paramount to living a happy life together. Even when the love is not there (or financial success in the case of a company), you still stick together due to personal affection towards one another.
Now that finding this perfect partner is out of the way, why have a cofounder in the first place? After having founded Commonbase by myself, I realized just how lonely the journey is. Even when you are very strong-willed and put in the same amount of energy working solo, the journey will always be lonely since you can never have a cofounder-like relationship with your other team members. This alone might be a strong enough reason to have a cofounder next to you for the whole journey.
Another aspect of talking against solo founding would be not having someone to bounce ideas off of who cares just as much and who has almost as much context as you. As I have been working on the current company as a solo founder, I have tried to use my investors and friends as this sounding board, but unfortunately, your investors are not as deep in the weeds and your friends just don’t care about the success of the company to the same level as you do. Thus, they are not really great alternatives to having a cofounder.
What are scenarios then, where solo founding makes sense? Honestly, not so many. The only one I was able to think of is the case where you really need to start a company immediately and you don’t have that ideal person next to you when you kick things off. As I said before, having no partner is better than just a placeholder. Also, incorporating a company alone does not rule out bringing in another person next to you at a later point. In many cases, it might be even easier to convince the right person once there is already a little bit of progress made.
What would I recommend to folks who end up being solo founders nevertheless? You need to replace all emotional and balancing aspects of a cofounder with other people around you. Have a circle of other founders around you to release steam constantly. Ask your investors to be “hands-on” and actively question your decisions so that you would have an active sounding board before you waste too much time working on the wrong things. It’s also easier to attract amazing talent when you create a larger-than-normal employee pool, for example, 20% or 30% of total shares to make early joiners care more. My final advice to any solo founder (or friend in general) would be to have an amazing romantic partner next to them. Having someone who listens to you and understands all the emotional rollercoasters of a founding journey cannot be replaced. A great partner can make the difference between success and failure - as PG said, do not forgo love for the sake of your company. You will be doing both yourself and your company a disservice.
Finally, if you are a solo founder going through this journey right now, please do reach out. Even though I might not know what you are struggling with every moment, I will understand what you are going through emotionally. That’s worth more than gold.