3 ms·

We're talking about using this to get peak performance out of your people. You can take the "everyone should be hard as nails forever or they're not a real entr

• tptacek 16y ago
  That's what we're talking about now, but note that this conversation didn't start out that way. Meanwhile, note two things: first, that you may in reality be a lot more replaceable than you think you are, and second, that you are almost certainly perceived as being a lot more replaceable than you perceive you are. As soon as you sell board seats, the question of your ruthless replacement stops being a moral issue and starts being a business issue. Venture capitalists aren't investing their own money. It is the case that their absolute most important priority is the protection of their investors money.
  • nickpinkston 16y ago
    Were you the founder / CEO of any the funded startups you were involved with? Not an ad hominem, just wondering where you're coming from. I think the fundamental issue here though is that there are massive costs of having an under-performing head founder. Replaceability is a massive risk (bad replacement, moral, public image, learning periods, etc.) compared to what it costs to keep the original CEO happy and driving hard toward the dream - assuming they're good in that position in the first place.
    • tptacek 16y ago
      Equal-equity founder (not referring to my current company, Matasano, which we bootstrapped in 2005).