closely related to the previous post. This post from Allen Morgan is a remarkable dissection of issues that every VC has seen with startup founding teams. I think part of the reason why founders don't always pick the right co-founders has to do with elements of human nature. There is a lot of insecurity associated with being a founder, I think it's pretty natural that a lot of entrepreneurs build up their teams with people who buy into their passion even if it means adding a founding team member that is not a great functional fit. The thing that separates experienced founders from the other variety is that experience forces you to continually refine and enhance your team, even if that means parting ways with a founder. At the end of the day, the CEO calls the shots on how best to build his or her team.
Link: Allen's Blog: More on "Tough Questions".
I would claim that this “standard” org chart is actually a good template to follow in organizing a startup through, say, the first 40 people. I’m not sure if the converse is true, but I can say (without having done a rigorous study) that, in my 25 years of working with startups, there is an interestingly strong correlation between (1) startups with org charts that were “contorted” in some way (compared to the “standard” one) and (2) startups that ended up with some kind of founder trouble.
Comments