BOOM 🤯 💥 BUILDING IN SILENCE💥📈

We have all heard the phrase “When you Build in Silence, people won't know where to attack”

Building in silence entails working discreetly with minimal public exposure, whereas building noisily entails sharing progress publicly and engaging an audience with development progress.

But why should a founder choose to build in silence over engaging the external stakeholders on their project? Here are some of the upsides and downsides of building in silence.

🖊 Focus: While engaging external stakeholders can give valuable feedback and early validation on the product development, building in silence gives the team an edge to focus on their product without much influence and worrying about the public opinion and most importantly competition.

🖊 Flexibility: Internal stakeholders can decide to pivot to a more adoptable solution during the development stage following new and emerging technologies without prejudice, whereas building noisily could cause mistrusts incase of a diversion leading to a reputational risk and scare away potential users and investors

🖊 Venture Funding - Lack of engaging external stakeholders leads to less visibility, thus ending up attracting fewer or no external funding and can deter investors. Investors are usually attracted to a community driven solution with clear metrics on user engagements and feedback, among others.

🖊 User Feedback: While building in silence can result in reduced public scrutiny and less pressure during development, valuable user feedback is lost in the process, which can lead to death on arrival upon product launch.

Which approach would you rather take?

Thoughts?