You're a non-technical founder. You need a developer. You post on Upwork. 47 applications in 24 hours. Half are clearly spam. The other half all claim 10+ years of experience, 5-star ratings, and expertise in every technology you mentioned. Their portfolios look professional. Their rates range from $15/hour to $150/hour. You have no idea how to tell who's actually good and who's just good at looking good. This is one of the most expensive mistakes non-technical founders make: hiring based on credentials, rates, and portfolios instead of actual ability to deliver. According to YC data, technical co-founder mismatch is the #2 reason founding teams dissolve, right after founder conflict. And for non-technical founders hiring contractors, the failure rate is even higher—60-70% of first hires don't work out.
Here's the hard truth: you don't need to learn to code to hire great developers. You need a framework for evaluation that works even when you can't read code. The best developers aren't always the most credentialed, the cheapest, or the most expensive. They're the ones who communicate clearly, deliver reliably, and make good decisions when you're not looking. This post gives you a practical framework non-technical founders can use to evaluate developers based on behaviors you can observe, not technical skills you can't assess.
Ask About Trade-offs
Great developers think in trade-offs. Bad ones give absolute answers. Ask questions like:
- "What are the downsides of your proposed approach?"
- "When would a different technology be a better choice?"
- "What would you do differently with more time/budget?"
If a developer can't articulate trade-offs, they're either inexperienced or trying to sell you something.
Look at Communication
Technical skill matters less than you think. Communication matters more. Evaluate:
- Can they explain technical concepts in plain English?
- Do they ask clarifying questions before starting work?
- Do they proactively communicate problems or wait to be asked?
- Can they give realistic timelines and stick to them?
Check Their Process
Ask about their development process:
- How do they handle changing requirements?
- What happens when they hit a blocker?
- How do they ensure code quality?
- What does "done" look like to them?
Reference Checks Matter
Talk to their previous clients. Not the references they provide — find people independently. Ask specifically about communication, reliability, and how they handled problems.
Red Flags to Avoid
Red Flag #1: No Questions About Your Business — If a developer jumps straight to technology choices without understanding your business model, target users, or constraints, they're building to a tech spec, not solving your problem.
Red Flag #2: Guarantees Without Caveats — "I can build this in 4 weeks, guaranteed" without asking follow-up questions means they either don't understand scope or are over-promising to close the deal.
Red Flag #3: Dismissive of Your Ideas — You're non-technical, but you know your business. Good developers listen and translate your ideas into technical solutions. Bad ones dismiss non-technical feedback as "not understanding how software works."
Red Flag #4: Can't Explain Their Work — If they can't explain what they're building in simple terms, it's either overly complex or they don't fully understand it themselves.
Red Flag #5: Pressure to Decide Immediately — "I have other clients waiting" or "this rate is only good this week" are sales tactics. Good developers are busy but professional about timelines.
Red Flag #6: No Code Samples or Portfolio — Everyone has something they can show. If they don't, or if they're evasive about sharing work, that's a warning sign.
Trial Projects That Reveal Truth
Hire for a small, paid trial project first. Budget: $1,000-3,000 for 1-2 weeks of work. This reveals more than any interview.
What to test in a trial:
- Do they ask clarifying questions before starting?
- Do they provide progress updates without being prompted?
- Do they meet deadlines or communicate early if they can't?
- Is the code organized and documented?
- Can they explain what they built and why they made specific decisions?
- How do they handle feedback or change requests?
Good trial project ideas:
- Build one core feature of your product with clean handoff documentation
- Audit and document your existing codebase (if applicable)
- Create a technical architecture proposal for your MVP
- Build a small proof-of-concept for your riskiest technical assumption
How to evaluate trial results: Did you feel confident during the process? Could you understand their explanations? Did they deliver what they promised? If yes to all three, move to a larger engagement.
Reference Checks Matter
Talk to their previous clients. Not the references they provide — find people independently. Ask specifically about communication, reliability, and how they handled problems.
Key Takeaways
- Judge developers on trade-off thinking, not absolute answers — great developers explain pros and cons
- Communication matters more than technical skill — can they explain complex concepts in plain English?
- Ask about their process: how they handle change, blockers, and define "done"
- Red flags: no business questions, guarantees without caveats, dismissive of your input, pressure tactics
- Trial projects ($1,000-3,000 for 1-2 weeks) reveal more than interviews — test communication and delivery
- Check references independently — ask about communication, reliability, and problem-handling
The best developers aren't always the most technically skilled. They're the ones who communicate clearly, deliver reliably, and make good decisions when you're not looking. That's exactly how we structure our technical partnerships. Also relevant: prioritizing MVP features.