3 ms·
I think there is a simple and rationale explanation for this... I believe founders that step away from the role of CEO seek to put in place someone who priorit
by lefstathiou 10y ago
I think there is a simple and rationale explanation for this...
I believe founders that step away from the role of CEO seek to put in place someone who prioritizes the business as (close to) as much as they do (ie before family, friends, life etc). The problem is how do you find someone to love (yes love or at least pretend to) the business without them owning a meaningful piece of it (the equity that is)? When granting sixeable equity is not an option (most founders I know who built successful companies are highly protective of it) the solution is you buy it. Mark Zuckerberg owns 30% of Facebook. The professional CEO that one day replaces him will own 0.0000001% of it. That's not very motivating for entrepreneurial CEO types who are ideal for these roles. Mark isn't going to go to sleep easy at night unless he knows the person running the show eats sleeps and breathes Facebook the way he has for the last 30 years. That person is buying his dream, he's buying their loyalty and commitment (and great judgment, etc etc).