Bridging the gap: How non-technical leaders can drive their tech teams to success

In a start-up world full of software engineers, most might assume that the people at the helm of it all are technical experts, but that’s not always the case. In fact, many non-technical leaders lead successful tech teams. From Ben Silbermann, co-founder and CEO of Pinterest, to Stewart Butterfield, co-founder and CEO of Slack, successful non-technical leaders have proven their advantages time and time again because of their broader perspectives on business vision and customer needs, a clearer focus on problem-solving and reduced technical echo chambers.

This comes with its challenges too, many of which I’ve experienced first-hand. Without programming skills or knowledge, how can you manage engineers and developers? Without technical jargon, how can you make yourself understood?

The truth is, there is a fundamental communication gap between non-technical and technical stakeholders. While one party thinks in big-picture vision and goals, the other approaches problems through systems, structures and feasibility. This gap inevitably leads to confusion, misunderstandings, delays and frustration – serious roadblocks that halt progress and damage morale.

While it can be tough, bridging this gap is not insurmountable. The key is communication. Let’s dive a little deeper into four common friction points between non-technical stakeholders and tech teams and explore some possible solutions.

Lost in translation

One common pitfall is that you and your tech team don’t speak the same language. You speak business, while they speak in technical jargon. Well-versed in their specialised terminology, your team may not realise how their explanations confuse non-technical stakeholders, leading to miscommunication, wasted time, and slower decision-making.

It’s frustrating and unnecessary, yet incredibly common.

In The Lean Startup, entrepreneur and author Eric Ries highlights the importance of effective communication in creating a shared vision. He argues that building a common language between technical and non-technical teams is critical to success. Without it, teams will inevitably struggle with inefficiencies, misaligned goals, and misunderstandings.

But isn’t that easier said than done?

The key is to proactively foster a culture of clear explanation from the outset. Instead of accepting vague statements like “it’s too technically difficult,” dig deeper. What does that really mean? Is it impossible, time-consuming, or only feasible with additional resources?

Technical jargon has its place in meetings, but misunderstandings don’t. This is where storytelling can help. Creating a shared glossary for developers and non-technical stakeholders ensures everyone is on the same page. Encouraging the use of visuals such as diagrams, flowcharts, and wireframes can also make complex ideas more accessible.

When teams communicate effectively, they identify and resolve issues faster, accelerating project completion. Open communication fosters idea-sharing, making quickfire 10-minute stand-up meetings an invaluable tool for building a culture of clarity and collaboration.

Bottlenecks and breakdowns

It’s easy to fall into the trap of expecting fast execution from your tech team, but how do you know if you’re overworking them or if they’re taking advantage of your knowledge gap and not doing enough?

Recognising the fine line between overworking your team and inefficiency can be challenging. All teams have their capacity limits. Frequent delays, increased defect rates and disengagement could be early indicators that your team is overloaded, but it could also be a sign of unclear priorities or time mismanagement.

To navigate this, it’s important to have a clear understanding of how to track progress and identify the signs of overload. Use agile tracking methods, like cycle time analysis and work-in-progress (WIP) limits to help you visually track your team’s workload, pinpoint bottlenecks and access capacity in real-time. This will help avoid unrealistic expectations and encourage a more sustainable working pace.

These agile practices also encourage a more iterative approach, helping to distribute work more evenly and manage capacity more effectively to keep the team focused, prevent overwork and ensure long-term success.

The true cost of a quick fix

It’s a familiar scenario: a non-technical founder suggests a seemingly small change, but the tech team pushes back. Both parties feel misunderstood and undervalued.

The main issue lies in differing priorities.

On the one hand, rapid innovation and disruption are the norm in the tech industry, and the pressure is on to keep up with competition. Team leaders need to deliver – fast. But on the flip side, changes need to be scalable, secure and maintainable. Even implementing tiny changes at the wrong time can have a detrimental impact and lead to what is known as ‘technical debt’, ultimately slowing down development in the long run. Research shows that companies pay an additional 10-20% to address tech debt on top of the costs of any project. Little wonder why it’s called the “silent startup killer”.

To bridge this gap, non-technical stakeholders need to take a more inquisitive approach. Instead of pushing for a quick fix, ask questions that allow you to get a better picture of the scale and complexity involved. Using frameworks like an impact vs effort matrix can help assess the feasibility of changes and ensure that both the technical and business perspectives are considered.

The dangers of over-reliance

If you find a skilled engineer you can trust, it can be tempting to lean heavily on their expertise to drive a project forward, particularly if you are self-conscious about your lack of technical acumen. But relying on a single person or team also limits opportunities for collaboration and innovation. Countless studies show that projects that rely heavily on one person are more likely to fail. In the 2023 State of Dev Ops Reports, Google highlights that the highest-performing teams are cross-functional. Relying on one person or team risks missing out on the benefits of a more diverse problem-solving approach.

The solution is simple: Build a balanced team. Focus on hiring technical experts with varied experience to ensure that different aspects of the project are handled by specialists who are best placed to execute them. This will also reduce the risk of single points of failure and nurture a more resilient and collaborative environment.

Connecting the gap with clear communication

It’s by no means unusual for non-tech founders to run highly successful tech teams. At top level, Brian Chesky leveraged his co-founder’s technical expertise to create AirBnB. Reid Hoffman created LinkedIn based on an understanding of the value of hiring a strong tech team and iterating on feedback, not technical prowess. Steward Butterfield is a non-techie founder who has built a viral hit product, Slack. Thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of tech teams across the globe are run by non-technical experts.

It’s difficult, but it’s possible

If you want to build a great product, you need to have a great team, and that requires great communication. As we’ve established, it’s not easy; both sides will inevitably make assumptions about each other’s knowledge and expectations, leading to misunderstandings and misaligned goals. As a non-technical founder or team leader, it falls to you to foster a culture of communication and explanation. You need to ask the right questions, understand the complexities behind technical decisions and respect the constraints of your team. Communication is key – invest in it, nurture it and success will follow.