Paul Graham’s Founder Mode essay, based on a recent talk from AirBnB founder Brian Chesky, has been getting quite a lot of attention over the past few days. It has prompted many a quote tweet, and founders, such as Bryan Cantrill of Oxide Computer, have started contributing their own thoughts to what founder mode means to them.

Having held positions of influence at a few companies, but never having been a founder myself, my initial read raised a few thoughts about my own experience of trying to “scale myself” in a growing organization. However, given that many who do have experience as founders have already weighed in on that front, I think the topic more pertinent to my experience is what it looks like to work with a CEO in founder mode.

On the surface, founder mode as described by Graham could be viewed as a negative for other influential members of the organization. It is positioned in contrast to a manager mode in which direct reports are given more autonomy in both roadmap and execution. In my experience, working with an effective founder mode CEO has actually been more enjoyable than one in manager mode. I have found that that the leader’s candor typically permeates throughout the organization, and others feel empowered to occupy the full scope of their role because they see the CEO doing the same.

That being said, I believe the leaders in founder mode require more help from those around them, not less. In Graham’s words:

Where the borders of autonomy end up, and how sharp they are, will probably vary from company to company. They’ll even vary from time to time within the same company, as managers earn trust.

A founder mode leader must constantly be experimenting with and evaluating these borders, which can be draining. There are a few ways in which others in the organization can help them be successful.

  1. Be opinionated: The worst case scenario for an organization with a leader in founder mode is for everyone else to blindly comply. I think so many organizations are drawn towards manager mode because it appears to have a higher floor than founder mode. When decision making is spread across many different actors, the probability that one can bring down the entire ship may be diminished. In founder mode, decision making power is more centralized, meaning that poor decision-making can quickly derail the entire organization. It is vital that those closest to the founder constantly express their view points, undeterred by any historical pattern of their ideas being enacted.
  2. Respect the organizational hierarchy: In addition to challenging the founder, individuals must also be ready to accept decisions and move forward without reservation or resentment. Hierarchy is neither inherently bad or inherently good. Hierarchy makes decision making power explicit, which can lead to bad outcomes when that power is abused. However, when that power is wielded with the proper reverence and respect, hierarchy can create an efficient and coherent system. While hierarchy may look different in every organization, it is unlikely that an organization with a founder mode leader will be successful if others are not willing to occupy their role in the hierarchy. Sometimes that role may be the decision maker.
  3. Force explicit decision making: Founders go wrong when there is an imbalance of privilege and responsibility. A founder mode leader is granted tremendous privilege, but they must accept commensurate responsibility. Things can quickly go awry if they are unwilling to accept responsibility, but also are unwilling to cede decision making power to those around them. This frequently manifests as delaying decisions, rather than deferring them to someone else. This can happen when a founder has lost confidence, or has too much on their plate. Individuals close to them are most helpful when they remain persistent until a decision is made, whether by the founder themselves or someone they delegate to.

Perhaps the primary takeaway is that founder mode is less about being a founder, and more about taking ownership. By that definition, an organization that is successful with a leader in founder mode is one in which those around them are also in founder mode (albeit with different context and constraints). They take ownership, and in doing so, make it more apparent where the leader should draw the “borders of autonomy”. As a side benefit, they are becoming more equipped to one day be founders themselves.