Founders Syndrome
Where to begin.
Founders Syndrome is a phenomenon that is not talked about a lot. It might be considered one of the more insipid manifestations of the nonprofit sector, but it is also one of the most common obstacle for growing, and leading, an organization.
Founders are amazing. Do not get me wrong. They take risks, they start organizations, they focus on the thing that drives them and they are relentlessly obsessed in their pursuit of accomplishing success of their pet project. And often, this is exactly when and why things go wrong.
Not seldom is an organization benefiting from a dedicated soul, who is single-mindedly in pursuit of reforming or designing or creating a certain aspects of the non-profit universe. They see an issue or problem that nobody is taking on and they are convinced that they, and only they, can make the change that’s needed.
As a result, this is how great organizations are built, survive, and thrive. A committed individual who is singularly dedicated and who will bring others along, to grow and expand, change and adjust, to reach the goal that they have set out to achieve.
Often, this mindset is a trajectory for success. The Girl Scouts. The Red Cross. Save the Children. Huge organizations that sprung out of original thought, tenacity and a single-mindedness above all. And, there are countless smaller organizations that do amazing work, close to the people and the communities they serve.
But that single-mindedness, that initial driving force, is also one of the reasons that organizations fail. The one person, sometimes two in a team, can be the single biggest obstacles for an organizations to take that next step, to grow, to expand, and to realize that very dream, but on a larger scale.
Let’s break this down.
Founders are convinced that they are the only ones that actually know how to solve the problem they have identified. They have inserted themselves into all aspects of the issue - and the solution. They, in their minds, sit on the answers. Only they.
And then, they realize that they are growing, and that’s what they want. They help more clients, they expand programs and involve more people in their cause.
But what they don’t want is to share or relinquish any kind of oversight or detail, big or small. In essence to give up power, and the source of adrenaline that fuels their commitment, day after day, year after year. They require to be granularly involved in every move, every step, every decision. They want to remain in charge of every part of the organization, while more or less pretending that others may come in and help.
This leads to another area where founders are sorely lacking - trusting others. While not outright suspicious, they rarely fully trust people who don’t share their passion to the same extent as they do. Giving up their personal lives; working all hours of the day; forgoing some or all compensation to, in their mind, better serve their clients, are all examples of their commitment and reluctance to give an of it up.
But this behavior is also a sign of overinvolvement, of claiming the spot of being the only one who knows what to do; and how to do it. The tendency to become a micro manager, a control freak, is lurking in many founders as they crave assistance to see their dream realized but are unwilling to negotiate control to make it happen. Quite the conundrum.
Working 24/7 for the cause also includes guilt-tripping others who function on a ‘normal’ schedule; not taking or supporting appropriate payment is denying co-workers of their value; and not taking vacation or time off is setting a standard that the charitable world doesn’t need – more individuals who think that an emotional connection is necessary, even required, when working in this field. It is a disservice to all others, who consider the nonprofit sector a professional commitment; it shouldn’t involve giving up one’s life for it.
Power trips are another obstacle that can rear its ugly head, and becoming a problem when a founder feels pressured to give others a say in the process. This is a route that rather than building on individuals who are also committed to the cause, will make people leave. The work so far has been accomplished will then leave with them.
I have written about the one-wo/man-band in a previous blog, as a bad business model for any organization. The founder syndrome is a variation on this condition.
The solution?
It depends. The tried and true ageing-out-of-the-job will sometimes solve the problem; the founders literally are too old to go on and others take over. In other scenarios, a sensible and informed funder is sending a message that it’s time to leave room for new ideas, new management, in order to realize the dreams that they once had; or the dream will vanish. The down-hill trajectory can be stopped.
It is difficult to put the finger on when a founder becomes obsessed with their own value and importance and refuses to see that they actually are the obstacle. It might never happen, which could negate some or all of the work that has been done, and inhibit needed developments to serve more clients, better.
But ultimately, it is up to the founder to see their own limitations and boundaries. Presented diplomatically, at the right time, it will produce the optimal outcome – growth, more clients served. A win-win for all!
Photo by Mikhail Kalinin.