Are no-code tools the future of entrepreneurship? [Interview With Joshua Tiernan]
I would say that most indie hackers choose -or at least started- building using no-code tools. And this happens simply because building without code helps us launch and test faster. Plus, you don't need to be an expert developer to turn your idea into a real business.
@Joshua_Tiernan, who founded Remote Circle—now acquired by WeWorkRemotely—is one of many entrepreneurs who choose to build using no-code tools. He now runs NoCodeFounders, a successful community of over 12K founders.
I interviewed Joshua to learn from his experience as a founder, and find out how he manages to keep a no-code community engaged.
https://unita.co/blog/nocode-automation-tools-and-the-future-of-entrepreneurship/
Nice! I have a question for anyone who is working to build a community, or who, like Joshua, has already built one; what do you think about Joshua's answer to this question?: I'm really curious to know what other people think about this question:
"What are your suggestions for building and sustaining an engaged community?
I think the main thing is to set up your community management processes at the very beginning and stick to them. Changing things once you have started can slow things down. So it’s best to have a good idea of the tools and processes you will follow to manage your community. This includes the type of culture you want to build, your onboarding processes, weekly events, etc."
Presumably, as your community grows, you'll naturally begin to receive feedback from people/start to observe certain patterns/preferences etc... I definitely see the benefit in "setting up your community management processes at the beginning and sticking to them," but how do you know how long to stick with certain systems for, and to what extent, and when to gradually start making changes to reflect what you think your growing community needs?
This is a similar question that I had. Communities are dynamic and often changing i.e new people are constantly signing up, and the community managers have an obligation to both support new members and ensure existing members are supported. This dance, however, is tough, because new members and existing members often have different interests and perspectives on the community.
At indie hackers, for example, new members who join can't post. They are concerned with finding posts that appeal to them and then enjoying those posts, but also interacting with other members of the community in the comments.
Existing members, however, have a different ambition potentially. They've been hanging here for a while and are interesting in novel content that appeals to them, and perhaps are only concerned with "new" posts that are interesting to them, and don't want to engage with topics they've seen before.
The goal is for a community to provide a space for both audiences, and for the two to mesh well together. Pulling this off, though, is more of an art than a science I believe. Unlike a SaaS product, which is stable and for the most part static, communities are like people and each day they look a little different.