I love the idea of peer groups, networking associations, co-working spaces, team work-shops and unconferences. I really do. I go to all these events, try and help out, speak, give time, free consulting and even the occasional drunken rant. These are important things to get out and do. They’re good places to meet partners, peers and mentors, get ideas, voice concerns and often get a free drink. In a town like Tampa, its difficult to work in that “campus-like” community that you get in some of the big tech cities. Our organizations like Tampa Bay WaVE and Barcamp take some of the place that you’d normally see taken by a well tied-in university. WaVE is working on a co-working space, organizes mixers and meetups and Barcamp helps spread new ideas, lets people talk that “college” kind of idealistic nonsense that is what I live for. Ideas need places to live, they need other minds to infect and other ideas to interact with. These groups do a good job of giving us a place to do that.

However there does seem to be this prevailing idea in start-up owners I meet at some of these things that having a dedicated PLACE to work is a requirement for DOING work. I completely understand the requirement for getting out of your basement/cave/parents-house and getting some work done at the office/coffee shop/bus stop. Hell, I understand getting out of pretty much ANYWHERE your work – I often leave Sourcetoad’s comfortable offices with our ridiculously fast fiber connections and comfy chairs to go to a hookah cafe with spotty WiFi and metal chairs because the change in pace and place is useful in creative thought. But the skills required to be a good business are the same they’ve always been – hard work and grit.

How many million or billion dollar companies have been started in garages or basements or dorm rooms? What you need to be a good start up is long hours in front of a terminal in the dark to give you that blue-tan that venture capitalists respect. It’s pretty well understood these days that if you want next-round funding/space/love/etc you need to show up with a working model that works. Tech is too easy in this day and age that if you show up with a nice power-point and some mockups you’re not going to fool anyone. And the kind of work and time that is required to get there has nothing to do with where you do it. In fact, I’d say that the people who have time to complain about WHERE they’re going to work clearly are not spending enough time actually working. If you don’t have the grit to lock yourself in a bedroom, scam a library space or simply learn to turn off your TV and Playstation and just write code from morning to night, you’re probably not going to make it anyway, regardless of where you sit. It would be lovely to have a co-working space, or have some other company let you share their offices or have enough cash to rent someplace small, but it is not a requirement.

True Grit

I think that some of the “incubators” that have sprung up are excellent examples of this lack of understanding, and opportunistic greedy bastards who don’t actually do anything for the community. We’re not talking about a small amount of cash either, some of these places charge New York prices to be in their fancy buildings. If you’re asking start-ups to pay for space, you are making a difficult financial situation even harder. It is understandable that once you realizes that start-up really want this “place-to-work” that you can take the idea of the West Coast incubators and create some sort of University sponsored profit center, but they end up being filled by businesses started on university IP, or friends of the board or whatever. They’re also heavily focused on bio-tech as apposed to the IT stuff that I normally come into contact with.

If your mission was first and foremost to help nurture and help the tech-start up community in Tampa Bay, you would take equity rather than cash for these spaces. Obviously it’s not a model that works when there is not a lot of cash around, but more importantly it is a model that does’t work when there is not a lot of belief around. If equity was what was traded, the backers would want pretty solid ideas, business plans and management teams to fill these prized free spaces. In order to get there, you’d need a group of folks who were knowledgeable and experienced enough to evaluate the merits of the plan and the team in order to make a wise investment of the space. But these people don’t exist in Tampa, or they do, but they’re too busy doing what they’re doing that would make them good candidates.

My point is that if there were a ton of really great and successful start-ups that had come of the community here, our incubators would be more like the ones out West, but they’re not. It’s the same reason we’re not having to beat venture capitalists off with sticks down here. We need to do it ourselves. So either donate some cash to WaVE or one of the others, or get back to work and stop wasting time reading blogs.

Previous ArticleNext Article
I help companies turn their technical ideas into reality. CEO @Sourcetoad and @OnDeck. Author of Herding Cats and Coders. Fan of squash, whiskey, aggressive inline, and temperamental British sports cars.

Leave a Reply

Don’t Fall Into the Trap: Why Startup Software Development Isn’t Like Corporate Development

So, you’ve left the corporate world, and now it’s time to build your own startup. You’ve probably managed dev teams before, overseen product launches, maybe even helmed some fancy project management tools that made everything run like a well-oiled machine. You’ve done this before, right? Not exactly. When it’s your startup, everything changes—and, as I’ll explain, if you assume it’ll work the same way, you’re heading for a few surprises.

Startup founders often fall into a dangerous trap when starting a software project from scratch: thinking it’ll be just like building software inside an established company. Here’s why it’s not—and some advice on how to navigate the differences.

1. Switching from Product Manager to Teacher

In an established company, a software team already has two things that give them a serious edge: an existing market and a deep understanding of the business. They’re working within a proven model. Developers in that environment know what questions to ask, can fill in gaps intuitively, and likely understand why they’re building what they’re building.

At a startup, however, your devs are going to need a whole lot more context. They’re not working with familiar requirements—they’re working with your vision, which may be abstract at this stage. If your development team doesn’t understand why something matters, it’s a recipe for ambiguity and frustration on both sides.

Advice: Think of yourself less as a product manager and more as a teacher. Your job is to make sure they understand the core problems, not just the features. Teach them why each requirement matters, help them visualize the end-user, and create that shared language for decision-making. It might feel tedious, but it’s essential to avoid future misalignment and expensive rewrites.

2. Beware of Perfectionism — It’s the Budget Killer

In a large company, products with an existing user base often have to be polished. Features need to be rock-solid, invoices have to be perfect, and everything needs an audit trail. Startups, however, have a different goal: get an MVP in the hands of users fast. It’s a classic trap for first-time founders—focusing on “perfection” and “polish” before knowing if the business model even works.

Startup perfectionism is budget poison. It’s shocking how quickly adding “nice-to-have” features can chew through funding, especially if you’re paying a dev team to build things like automated invoicing or churn management before you’ve even proven people want what you’re selling.

Advice: Ruthlessly strip down your MVP. If a feature doesn’t help you validate your market, it goes on the “later” list. Keep the scope laser-focused on what helps you test your business assumptions. Let the non-essential features wait until you know you have customers who’ll use them.

3. Zen and the Art of the Startup Pivot

Building software for a startup means embracing one cold, hard truth: the business model will change. According to research, 93% of successful startups pivot at least once (and often more). Imagine being asked to go out and passionately sell something that you know might not look the same next year—or next month. It takes a level of zen acceptance that your original idea will likely morph, but that’s what keeps you flexible and ready to capture new opportunities.

For founders, that requires a mindset shift. You have to believe in your product, while also knowing you might be building the “wrong thing” in some way. The focus should be on preserving capital and brainpower for what’s next. The game is less about proving you’re right and more about staying adaptable.

Advice: Budget with pivots in mind. Set your burn rate assuming you’ll need to make big changes. Don’t let ego get in the way of listening to the market, and keep enough gas in the tank for at least one big strategic turn.

4. The Hard Work of Being Your Own “Internal Customer”

Here’s another big one. In a corporate environment, you have internal customers—departments or stakeholders with specific goals that align with the overall company mission. For a startup, the only customer you have is you. You don’t have a preexisting feedback loop from various departments, and you don’t have established success metrics. You have to create that from scratch.

Advice: Start by building an internal customer profile based on your target market, then use that to set clear goals and success criteria for your dev team. If you’re focused on, say, usability for early adopters, set KPIs around usability testing and build from there. By acting as your own “internal customer,” you’re setting a clear direction and saving your team from working in a vacuum.

5. Get Ready to Build AND Sell

Corporate software development often has the luxury of a separate, dedicated sales team to deliver the product to the right audience. As a startup founder, you’re both the builder and the seller. That means you’re not just iterating on software—you’re iterating on messaging, product-market fit, pricing, and maybe even distribution models.

Advice: Factor in time for sales-ready iteration in your dev cycle. As you build, keep track of how each release or update affects the user experience. Ask yourself if the changes make your pitch clearer or simpler and how they align with the current market’s needs. Ultimately, this approach will help you bridge the gap between building the product and ensuring it’s market-ready.

Conclusion

Building software as a startup founder requires a whole different toolkit than you may be used to. You’re part-teacher, part-salesperson, part-zen master, and always the chief budget officer. By recognizing the unique mindset shifts and traps of startup software development, you’re positioning yourself—and your team—for the best chance of success. Focus on creating clarity for your team, set ruthless priorities, embrace change, and never lose sight of the fact that the first version is just the beginning. In the startup world, adaptability isn’t just a skill—it’s the entire game.