The first answer is: yes. Absolutely. Every "founder" really needs to be deep in the nitty gritty of the business. There's absolutely no point in investing a pile of time into technology that isn't going to be driving the business goals forward. A technical co-founder who has no interest in the direction that the business is going really is more of an employee than a co-founder.
The second answer is: yes, but with a balance. Here's a situation that's pretty easy to imagine: together, you have a fantastic idea for a product that will require a PILE of technical work. You're working away on getting an MVP ready to demo to investors or to beta users. In that case, how much effort should the tech co-founder be putting into the pitch deck, compared to effort that could be going into developing the product? That's a balance that you'll have to figure out together.
Comments
There's two sides to this, from my point of view.
The first answer is: yes. Absolutely. Every "founder" really needs to be deep in the nitty gritty of the business. There's absolutely no point in investing a pile of time into technology that isn't going to be driving the business goals forward. A technical co-founder who has no interest in the direction that the business is going really is more of an employee than a co-founder.
The second answer is: yes, but with a balance. Here's a situation that's pretty easy to imagine: together, you have a fantastic idea for a product that will require a PILE of technical work. You're working away on getting an MVP ready to demo to investors or to beta users. In that case, how much effort should the tech co-founder be putting into the pitch deck, compared to effort that could be going into developing the product? That's a balance that you'll have to figure out together.
Yeah, nailed it. Its a tough trade-off and a really good reason why there should be 3 co-founders.