Founding a business does not automatically mean that the founder is the best person for every leadership position within it. While founders bring the original vision, passion, and often significant knowledge to their businesses, I believe roles should ultimately be assigned based on strengths, experience, and what is best for the growth of the company. Leadership decisions should not be driven by ego or status, but by who can currently bring the most value to achieving the mission and vision of the business.
In The Founder’s Dilemmas, Wasserman explains that assigning titles and decision-making authority can become a major source of tension among cofounders (Wasserman, 2013). The CEO title is particularly significant because it carries both symbolic meaning and actual authority. Wasserman cautions against automatically making the person who developed the original idea the CEO. Although that individual may possess the passion and vision necessary to launch the company, another founder may have skills and experience that make them better equipped to lead it. I believe recognizing this requires maturity. If someone else is better suited for a responsibility, allowing that person to take the role is not a loss for the founder. It can actually be a wise decision to relinquish some control for the growth and ultimate benefit of the business.
Research on founder-CEO succession reinforces this idea. In a study of 202 Internet startups, Wasserman found that accomplishing important milestones, including completing product development and securing additional financing, could actually increase the likelihood of founder-CEO succession (Wasserman, 2003). This demonstrates how the leadership needs of a startup can evolve as the business grows. The person who was best equipped to begin the journey may not always be the person best equipped for every stage that follows.
Clearly defining roles is also important. I do not believe role clarity will prevent all conflict because disagreements are inevitable when people work together. However, clarity can establish expectations and reduce unnecessary overlap. In a meta-analysis of 74 independent correlations involving 11,698 participants, it was found that role ambiguity was negatively related to job performance (Tubre & Collins, 2000). This supports the importance of people understanding their responsibilities, even if clearly defined roles cannot eliminate every disagreement.
Ultimately, founders should be willing to ask where they can add the most value rather than which title gives them the most authority. Ego should not determine who leads what. The needs of the business, the abilities of the individuals involved, and the overall mission should guide those decisions. Sometimes strong leadership means stepping forward, but other times it means having enough wisdom to recognize when someone else is better equipped to lead in a particular area.
References
Tubre, T. C., & Collins, J. M. (2000). Jackson and Schuler (1985) revisited: A meta-analysis of the relationships between role ambiguity, role conflict, and job performance. Journal of Management, 26(1), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(99)00035-5?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Wasserman, N. (2003). Founder-CEO succession and the paradox of entrepreneurial success. Organization Science, 14(2), 149–172. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.2.149.14995?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Wasserman, N. (2013). The founder’s dilemmas: Anticipating and avoiding the pitfalls that can sink a startup. Princeton University Press.
I really liked your point that founders should focus on where they can add the most value, not which title gives them the most authority. This can also apply to how founders choose roles for the people around them. Especially early on, it can be easy to give responsibilities to people you already know and trust rather than stopping to consider whether they are actually the best person for that specific role.
This relates to what I discussed in my post about homogeneous teams. Having people around you with similar experiences or whom you already know can make communication and trust easier, but that doesn’t necessarily mean everyone is in the best position to contribute the most. As a business grows, founders have to be more willing to look outside their original group and bring in people with different strengths and experiences. I agree with your point that sometimes being a strong leader implies recognizing that someone else may be better able to manage a certain area of the business.
LikeLike