There has been quite a bit of discussion going back and forth on the merits of a single-founder vs co-founder business in the tech/entrepreneurial circles. In fact, I recently had a conversation with a few successful entrepreneurs on this subject recently and came away with some conclusions. After reading this article on the subject today, I have to give it my personal twist.
So next time you read, write or comment on an article comparing the merits of single and co-founders; next time you feel your personal choice undermined by someone else’s argument, stop and ask yourself: is this about forging an empire, or being master of your own destiny? They’re not the same thing.
I would like to say that in my case, I have come to realise that the reason that I am going into business has always been the same since day one – it has never been about empire building, but about personal freedoms. I have always been clear on this – I need to build a successful company in order to have the freedom to engineer.
That said, the reason why I have decided to go it on my own as a single-founder business is because I am not interested in building a corporation, but interested in starting a religion (not literally). So far, I don’t know of any religion where there are co-founders since most religions seem to have had a single teacher or saviour. There is a reason why this is the case – religions are about passion.
So, instead of building a lifestyle business, I am in the process of starting my own little religion, and I hope that others will ultimately join me. Hiring and contracting will be the way to go for me for a while at least. Donations will also be solicited and welcomed, in addition to volunteers and support. I think it is interesting that such a business model will be used for a technology company.
Sounds crazy? That’s the whole point.