This article looks at humanoid robots: what tends to work, what usually fails, and how to start.
The Framework That Actually Works
Here is a simple framework for evaluating humanoid robots. It's not complicated, but it requires discipline.
Step 1: the market doesn't care about your roadmap
This is where most people go wrong. They skip this step entirely and jump straight to execution. Don't do that.
Step 2: you should focus on one thing and do it exceptionally well
Once you have the foundation right, this becomes much easier. I've watched founders struggle with this for months when the answer was staring them in the face.
Step 3: Iterate relentlessly
Nothing works perfectly the first time. The companies that get humanoid robots right treat it as an ongoing process, not a one-time project.
The Counterintuitive Truth
In humanoid robots, the best practitioners often do less, not more.
The lesson: the market doesn't care about your roadmap. It sounds simple. It's incredibly hard to execute.
Why Most Approaches Fail
Many common approaches to humanoid robots are flawed at the root.
The root cause is usually one of three things:
Copying what big companies do without understanding why they do it. What works for Google doesn't work for a 10-person startup.
Over-engineering the solution when a simple approach would work better. I've seen teams spend six months building something that could have been done in two weeks.
Ignoring the human element. Technology is the easy part. Getting people to actually use it is where the real challenge lives.
What I Tell Founders
Before deciding anything about humanoid robots, start with three questions:
What's your timeline? Because the right approach for a company with 6 months of runway is very different from one with 3 years.
What have you already tried? Most founders have tried something. Understanding what didn't work is often more valuable than knowing what might.
Who on your team owns this? If the answer is "everyone" or "no one," that's your first problem to solve.
These questions seem simple but they reveal a lot about where a company actually stands.
This connects to broader themes around Tesla Optimus, warehouse robots, surgical robots that I've been thinking about a lot lately.
The Bottom Line
None of this is rocket science. But it does require intentionality, consistency, and a willingness to learn from mistakes.
If you take one thing from this article, let it be this: start now, start small, and iterate. The founders who win at humanoid robots aren't the ones with the best strategy on paper. They're the ones who execute, learn, and adapt faster than everyone else.
Companies that take humanoid robots seriously tend to pull ahead of the ones that don't.
If you're working on something interesting in this space, I'd love to hear about it. Drop me a line.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q:How has this view evolved over time?
My thinking on most topics has changed significantly over the years. Early in my career, I held many conventional views that experience proved wrong. I try to update my beliefs when the evidence changes.
Q:Do all experts agree with this view?
No, and that's fine. The best ideas in business are often contrarian. I share my perspective based on my experience and data, but I encourage you to seek out opposing viewpoints and form your own conclusions.
Q:What experience informs this perspective?
This perspective comes from over a decade of building companies in Silicon Valley, two successful exits (RemoteTeam to Gusto, MovieLaLa to Gfycat), and investing in 234 startups including Anthropic, OpenAI, and Scale AI. I write about what I've lived.