The Apple boys used Jobs’ parents’ free garage. The Google boys used a friend’s garage for free (initially). HP founders used an unattached garage that was part of the home for which they shared the rent (Dave Packard and his wife lived in the house).

Thus the G+ thread was a discussion about what has replaced real garage spaces as a place where startups should startup. In the post’s comments, a number of apparent startup founders were praising the virtues of co-working spaces, claiming that they are the new startup garage.

I found this statement odd. Bootstrapping founders don’t pay for anything until they absolutely need it. Even if a startup has more money than they know what to do with, wise founders don’t pay for something until it is essential. To me, whatever is the cheapest location option for a startup is the new garage.

The key with the startup-bootstrapping approach is to minimize expenses upfront. Use space for which you are already paying but not using efficiently–your bedroom, dining room, garage, shed, basement, one-room apartment, or dorm room. Or borrow (for free) extra space in your parents’ or friend’s home or apartment. Coffee shops or even libraries might work too but co-working spaces definitely do not. Why spend precious resources when you can get space for free. Once you have an initial product to demo, and you’re beginning to gain traction, it may make sense to look for better facilities.

Renting an expensive place will not make you successful. The “it’s key for networking” mantra is a thinly veiled excuse. Nothing prevents you from networking if you work out of your house. If people only networked with people whom they share the same physical office building, then the world would collapse.

Whether you’re a bootstrapped startup or a well-funded startup, the key is execution on building your prototype, creating your MVP. Don’t foolishly waste cash just to be in a cool place. If you don’t have a founder’s team that can successfully execute the startup’s vision, then the team is flawed. Having the coolest place on earth will not change that. Besides, what can be cooler than starting up in a real garage — especially in the winter!

Note: Before any of my readers get a guilty feeling that I’m talking about you and your startup, relax. I’ve held this view for years and decided to share it after reading the interchange on the aforementioned G+ post. After all, my current startup uses the already-paid-for space in my house and my business partners’ houses. Although there is a fabulous co-working space in a high-tech park less than three miles from my house, I have zero interest in paying for more real estate when I already have real estate that I can use.

Whereas it is clear that a person who can be classified as a reluctant leader is currently a bad fit for the position, the brunt of the responsibility falls on the shoulders of that person’s immediate superior. Should they have been hired or promoted to project manager in the first place? Did they receive proper guidance and training? Were clear expectations and responsibilities proactively communicated?

Project Manager versus Managing a Project

In smaller firms, a person who is called a project manager may actually be a single person working on a single project. In that case, whereas they are managing a project, they are not truly a project manager. Project mangers usually oversee more than one project at a time and have a team of people whom they lead.

When a company’s backlog grows large enough, it is crucial to appoint a few, results-oriented project managers. Each project manager leads their own team of people. Each project team is tasked with handling a number of the firm’s overall projects in the backlog. The project manager will delegate various chunks of a project’s workload to the team, only keeping a small portion of the project work to his or herself.

Signs of a Reluctant Leader

To me, one of the telltale signs of a reluctant leader is that they would rather be doing the “real” project work and not that “other stuff”. How is that desire communicated? In different ways, but often like this.

When sitting in a meeting discussing a project issue, that project manager seems uncomfortable, maybe even frequently looking at their watch. They finally get the guts to say, “I need to get to work on the project,” or “can we end this discussion because I have to get back to work.”

It is not uncommon for reluctant leaders to assume that all the other duties of a project manager are subordinated to the project work itself. What they fail to realize is that successful project managers have many responsibilities that must equally be performed. Their share of an overall project’s work is just one of many duties.

Successful Project Managers

Successful project managers need to be proficient multitaskers. They need to accept as well as give constructive feedback; proactively communicate with clients and employees; build motivated, results-oriented project teams; sell their vision to their team, to clients, and to recruits; have a passion for leadership; and derive a good portion of their energy from coaching team members and helping each member reach their potential.

In addition to these basic requirements, successful project managers need to manage project chargeability (if measured), organize and lead team meetings, and oversee their share of an organization’s strategic plan. They also need to be results oriented, handle difficult employee issues, and oversee project QA/QC.

A project manager needs to respond in a timely fashion to all team-member inquires—even if it is uncomfortable to them based on his or her communication style. It is imperative that project managers provide clear guidance and direction, effectively delegate the work load, and, finally, perform their share of the project work—what reluctant leaders call the “real” project work.

What Makes a Project In Itself Successful?

Well, that depends on the overall goals for a given project. But a general definition is as follows: hitting the profitability goal, completing the project on time and on budget, and achieving more than satisfactory results for all parties.

In the end, it is up to a project manager’s superior to hold them accountable for project successes and failures. By doing so, it increases the success rate of future projects and can help mold a reluctant leader into a successful project manager.