Assumption 1: Innovation Only Thrives In-Person
Reality: Open-source projects like Linux and Git prove that innovation does not require a physical office. These globally-driven projects are proof that remote collaboration leads to incredibly successful products. Developers in emerging markets, driven by the motivation to participate in the global economy, often outperform their in-office counterparts because their focus is on solving problems, not on office politics, bureaucratic hurdles, or water cooler chitchats.
In fact, remote work attracts “geeks” who are more passionate about solving technical and business challenges than off-subject social interactions in an office setting. Additionally, many developers in developing countries have strong economic motivations to succeed remotely because it offers their best chance to tap into a wealthier market like the US. Their motivation to succeed in any setting is far more powerful than our motivation to work more because friends are at the office.
Assumption 2: US-Only Teams Are Essential
Reality: The US immigration system severely limits the ability of companies to hire top global talent. By posting US-only job ads, companies artificially restrict themselves to a narrow pool of developers and designers from specific universities, when in fact, highly skilled talent exists worldwide. Hiring internationally not only brings cost-effective solutions but also opens doors to diverse problem-solving perspectives. The legal hurdles of US immigration should not be the gatekeeper for accessing brilliant minds abroad, especially those who don’t come from affluent enough backgrounds to do a masters in the US.
Assumption 3: Cash and Equity Keep Talent Loyal
Reality: Silicon Valley often assumes that equity is the key to retaining talent, but this strategy is flawed in the US where highly skilled professionals still have multiple job options. Even with equity, many American workers leave startups for more lucrative or stable opportunities.
On the other hand, developers in South Asia and Africa view jobs with US companies as their best opportunity to participate in the global economy, making these opportunities far more compelling than they are in the US. In these regions, talented developers stay because this is their best option, and it often results in more loyalty and dedication than simply cash compensation.
Assumption 4: Control Over In-Person Work Is Greater
Reality: Many VCs believe that having teams in person allows for more control over work output. However, the opposite is often true. Remote teams operate with greater autonomy and often deliver more efficiently. The illusion of control in person can stifle creativity and lower morale, whereas remote workers, especially those in emerging markets, are driven by economic incentives and the opportunity to make an impact in the global marketplace.
Assumption 5: Remote Teams Waste Resources
Reality: There is a belief that remote teams are inefficient and burn more resources, but this is unfounded. In fact, startups waste resources on unnecessary expenses like high office rents and travel costs. Global remote teams can work without these overheads, channeling their budget into core development. Some startups in Silicon Valley spend over $17,000 a month on rent alone, which adds no tangible value to the product development process.
Assumption 6: Remote Development Lowers Product Quality
Reality: VCs often assume that quality is compromised with remote development, but this belief is outdated. With advanced collaboration tools, many remote teams build world-class software that rivals in-office work. In fact, by accessing global talent, companies can often find more creative, resourceful solutions because they tap into diverse problem-solving approaches. If remote teams had access to the same levels of venture capital as in-person teams, then they’d likely beat the in-person teams, which are dragged down by distractions and bureaucracy. By increasing competition, the remote global teams will bring the cost of overpriced US financial, technical, and even medical services down.
Assumption 7: Startups Are Built for High Attrition
Reality: While attrition is expected in startups, the idea that high attrition is inevitable can be detrimental. By hiring globally, companies can lower attrition rates because developers in emerging markets are more likely to stay. For many, these roles represent their best chance at upward mobility and are therefore valued more highly than by developers in the US with multiple options.
Assumption 8: National Security Concerns Justify US-Only Hiring
Reality: US-only hiring for “national security” reasons is often an excuse to overlook brilliant talent abroad, and in fact hurts national security. Excluding highly skilled developers from countries like Egypt, Algeria, Kenya, or Nigeria may even lead to more harm. By denying opportunities to participate in the global economy, the US risks radicalizing disenfranchised groups or pushing them to work for competing interests. Including global talent can actually strengthen national security by promoting stability and reducing economic disparity.
Assumption 9: Only US Teams Can Tackle Complex Problems
Reality: Complex problems do not have geographical boundaries. Some of the most innovative solutions come from remote collaborations between the US, Africa, Asia, and Latin America. By embracing a diverse set of talent, VCs and companies can solve problems more creatively and more cost-effectively.
Assumption 10: Networking Is the Key to Startup Success
Reality: While networking can help, product quality and market fit matter much more. Remote teams can focus on building innovative products without the distractions of networking events or social politics. With the right internet marketing strategies, remote teams can achieve product-market fit without relying on traditional Silicon Valley networking.
This blog post aims to debunk common Silicon Valley venture capital assumptions while offering a roadmap for tapping into global innovation, providing a more meritocratic and economically efficient approach.
