It can be lonely at the top, but liberating when you climb down
I founded our start-up over two years ago and acquired the title of CEO by default. At the same time I was also Chief Product Owner, Chief Marketing Officer, Chief Sales Officer, Chief Finance Officer, Chief Technology Officer, Chief Operations Officer, Chief Compliance Officer and Chief Bottle Washer.
Notwithstanding my high energy levels and persistence, you can’t scale a start-up with one person so in my role of Chief Talent Officer, and with enough runway to hire (but not to hire stars), I recruited an administrator, a graphic designer, two external IT suppliers (with 4 persons), a business development lead, an external accounting firm and an external legal firm. Our start-up team was now 8. These were people to whom I could delegate tasks so I could focus on what only I could do.
There’s an assumption that as founder you will not only excel at building a demonstrably better product than anyone else, but that you will be expert at selling that product (and fast), leverage those sales to secure funding from external investors, and at the same time nurture a growing team and grow an inspiring culture. Every plate has to be kept furiously spinning. Drop one and it’s game over. Repeat the funding cycle every 6 months. It’s exhausting. Bright and creative, I know I can do it. Only I can’t. No founder can be all things to all people all of the time.
As a founder its important to recognise what you are good at, and what you aren’t. As a founder it is right that you have a hand in all pies for some time (mainly product and sales), but you also need to be careful to ensure that over time you are empowering and facilitating (rather than controlling others) in pursuit of your start up’s goals. The mentality of ‘if I just worked a little more, a little harder, it will all work out’ is admirable. I plead guilty to that. As a founder no-one could possibly put me under more pressure than I do myself. Whilst objectively the start-up may be doing fine, subjectively I know it could, and should already be much more. Being crazy-busy and under pressure isn’t to be confused with results. Results are binary. Either you are hitting your target or you’re not. Working hard isn’t enough.
It is with this in mind, that I would urge any founder to recognise from the outset what they are, and aren’t good at, and to stick to their sweet spot. This is where you excel. Perhaps you think you are doing this, but consider this. If, for whatever reason the start up wasn’t creating the best product, raising the necessary funds, selling it fast enough, in short, if the business wasn’t growing would you hire a CEO with a demonstrable record of growing a business to come in and do so? Probably not, since as founder it’s your company and you want to remain in control. That inner voice may be telling you that if only you worked a little more, a little harder, a little smarter, it will all work out. It may, but with 93% of start-ups failing, I urge you to re-assess.
I have found three things liberating, perhaps you will do too.
The first was when I was confident enough to be honest with myself and our investors that I didn’t have all of the experience that was needed to grow the business. Until I did, I was driven to work harder by the fear that not being able to personally master every facet of start-up life was a sign of personal weakness. It isn’t, it takes courage and strength to be very honest about what you can’t bring to the table today. Rather than find me lacking, our investors took strength in ‘knowing thy founder’.
Second, whilst I don’t doubt your ability to achieve anything given enough time (you are a bright and creative entrepreneur after all), time and money isn’t something start-ups have a lot of, so whilst you may be tempted to try, don’t. Instead of spending time trying to become what you lack, focus on having those conversations that help tell you the specific candidate requirements for the person you need to bring in. Each hire has to be very strategic and very specific to your culture and your context.
Third, having admitted that you are lacking, and that you do need to hire, perhaps you recognise (however hard) that you actually need (but are still resisting) a CEO. Don’t. You have to bring in the skills and experience the business needs now to grow, otherwise you’ll flatline. If this is your worry, why not embrace scaling a true-zero hierarchy? In a true-zero hierarchy, it’s roles we need to fill, not positions. Bringing in a CEO-like person can fill in the gaps without filling in a CEO position. Dispensing with positions takes ego out of the equation, avoids debilitating political conflict, and enables your start up to focus on both what you’re missing and what you need to meaningfully grow.
