They Change Their Names on LinkedIn: The Go-To-Market Lesson Buried in Ukraine’s Tech Scene
On the Bricks & Bytes podcast, Ukrainian founder Oleg Demydenko described something quietly brutal about his own country’s tech scene: some of its best engineers downplay where they’re from, and their companies build extraordinary technology but never stop to sell it. Ukraine has more than 300,000 world-class developers and defense tech stress-tested in real conditions, yet it’s still mostly known as an outsourcing back office. The lesson reaches well past Ukraine, though. It’s one of the oldest go-to-market truths in tech, shown here in its harshest form: the technology that wins is usually the technology someone knew how to explain, and if you don’t own your story, someone else will capture the value of it.
There’s a small, telling detail Demydenko mentioned that’s hard to shake. Some Ukrainian engineers, he said, quietly change their names on LinkedIn. They anglicize them, smooth off the edges, make themselves easier for a Western buyer to trust. Not because they lack skill, but because they’ve learned that credibility in enterprise sales often has less to do with the work and more to do with how familiar you look to the person signing the check.
Sit with that for a second, because it’s a gut-punch dressed up as a small habit. A generation of engineers who can out-build almost anyone, deciding the smartest move is to hide the very thing that makes them different.
If you’re a founder, this should land close to home, wherever you’re based. What looks like a Ukraine story is really a mirror.
The engineers who hide where they’re from
World-class, and somehow invisible
Let’s be clear about the talent, because that’s not the weak link. Ukraine has somewhere north of 300,000 IT professionals, ranks among the top four suppliers of tech talent in the world, and has a long record of winning international programming olympiads. Its defense-tech engineers are building and shipping systems tested against a real adversary, which is about as demanding a proving ground as software gets. On raw ability, they have nothing to apologize for.
So the name-changing isn’t insecurity for its own sake. It’s a rational read of how buyers behave. People associate credibility with the brands and places they already know, and a founder trying to close a deal will bend toward whatever reduces friction. The problem is that it works in the short term and costs you in the long term. Every time you hide your origin to fit in, you hand your distinctiveness to someone else.
No time to sell
When you’re iterating too fast to position
The second half of Demydenko’s point is just as common, and just as expensive. Ukrainian teams, he said, often build and iterate so quickly that they never pause to package, name, and market what they’ve made. By the time they’d write the case study for version one, they’re already shipping version three. The work races ahead of the words.
This is the builder’s oldest trap, and it has nothing to do with geography. In enterprise sales, buyers usually can’t evaluate deep technology directly. They can’t read your codebase or judge your actuator design. So they buy the thing they can evaluate: the outcome, the confidence, the story. We saw the same lesson in our breakdown of Monumental’s playbook, where the winning move was to sell finished walls instead of robots. Lead with what the buyer gets, not the machine you built. A worse product with a clearer promise beats a brilliant one nobody can explain.
The founder lessons hiding in every episode, decoded weekly
Go-to-market, funding, and hard-won operator wisdom, in plain English.
Join 3000+ ReadersThe value goes to whoever tells the story
Outsourcing is a positioning problem, not a talent problem
Here’s the proof at national scale. Ukraine’s IT sector earns billions in exports, but most of that work is done under someone else’s brand, for a foreign client, as an outsourced supplier. The engineers get the wage, the client gets the credit, the product, and the durable value. Ukraine’s own agencies now describe the central challenge as moving “from outsourcing to innovation,” which in plain terms means owning the product and the narrative instead of quietly powering someone else’s.
Demydenko’s fear runs along the same line at company scale. His worry is that a brilliant Ukrainian startup gets acquired and then folded into a bigger brand, its people relegated to minor roles, its identity absorbed. Same pattern, whether it’s an individual anglicizing a surname or a whole country doing the world’s engineering while another flag goes on the box. Whoever tells the story keeps the value.
- Hiding the origin. You bury the one thing competitors can’t copy, your story, to look more familiar, and trade your edge for a smoother first meeting.
- Skipping the sell. You iterate so fast you never package the win, so a rival with a clearer promise takes the deal your product deserved.
What this means for your company
Own your narrative before someone else does
The fix isn’t spin, and it isn’t turning into a LinkedIn caricature. It’s treating positioning as part of the product, not an afterthought. Name and package what you’ve built so a buyer can hold it in their head. Lead every pitch with the outcome you deliver rather than the cleverness under the hood. And stop hiding the thing that makes you different, because a story your competitors literally cannot tell is the most defensible asset you have.
For Ukrainian founders, “built and battle-tested under fire” is exactly that kind of story, and erasing it to blend in throws away the edge. But the principle holds for anyone reading this. Substance still matters, deeply. It just doesn’t compound unless someone knows it’s yours. Build the best thing, then make very sure the credit lands where it should.
On the podcast, Demydenko described Ukrainian engineers quietly anglicizing their names and downplaying their origin on platforms like LinkedIn, so they read as more familiar to Western buyers. His point was that this reflects how credibility works in enterprise sales, where buyers lean toward brands and backgrounds they already recognize, not a lack of skill. The cost is that hiding your origin also hides your differentiation. (Source)
By most measures, yes. Ukraine has more than 300,000 IT professionals, ranks among the top four global suppliers of tech talent, and posts consistent top results in international programming competitions. Its defense-tech sector has become a fast-moving proving ground, with engineers shipping systems tested in real conditions. Talent is not the gap here. Visibility and positioning are. (Source)
Because buyers usually can’t judge deep technology directly. They can’t assess your architecture or hardware, so they evaluate what they can understand: the outcome you promise and how much they trust you to deliver it. That’s why selling the result beats selling the mechanism, a lesson we drew out in Monumental’s playbook, where offering finished walls rather than robots removed the buyer’s risk. Clear beats clever when the customer can’t inspect the clever part. (Source)
The value flows to whoever controls the story. Ukraine’s IT sector shows it at scale: world-class work done as outsourced supply means the wages stay home but the product, the brand, and the durable value sit with the foreign client. The national push described as moving “from outsourcing to innovation” is a direct response to exactly that leakage. The same thing happens to companies that get absorbed into a bigger brand without keeping their identity. (Source)
Treat positioning as part of the product. Give what you’ve built a clear name and package so a buyer can remember it, lead with the outcome rather than the underlying tech, and use your real origin story as an asset instead of hiding it. If your background gives you a story competitors cannot copy, like being battle-tested in extreme conditions, that’s an advantage to lean into, not erase. Substance plus a story you own is what actually compounds. (Source)
Related Articles
The Playbook of Europe’s Hottest Construction Robotics Startup
What It Takes to Rebuild Ukraine With Technology
