4 ms·

Ask News.YC: What titles are you using in your startup?

4 points by mattculbreth 20y ago

richcollins 20y ago
Co-Founder
mattculbreth 20y ago
What are most people calling themselves? We have three co-founders, one of whom runs the place. Right now we're going with: CEO, Co-Founder Co-Founder Co-Founder I can't decide if I like this or not, but I've seen it in quite a few places.
- jwecker 20y ago
  I think it works great. Everyone should always be prepared to wear multiple hats of course. It give you all a lot of flexibility when meeting and talking to other people / potential partners & affiliates / investors, etc.
gustaf 20y ago
We usually just use Co-founder, sometimes but rarely "CEO" and "Tech lead". What do you write on your business cards?
zaidf 20y ago
My biz cards to come will read: ceo / co-founder My partner: chief technology officer / co-founder -Zaid
goodgoblin 20y ago
I've given myself the title Executive Coffee Drinker, and my partner is the CIO - Chief Idea Officer. As for co-founder - I think it sounds a bit weak. Even if there are more than one founder, they can all be called Founder. Vice President's of other companies aren't called Co-Vice Presidents.
- zaidf 20y ago
  You're taking rules too literally:) Co-founder is a well accepted and used title. And like you say, co-vice presidents isn't and thus one is used and the other isn't.
prakster 20y ago
Suggest you remove "CEO" from your title. Having that word in your title has one, and only one, positive effect your co founders are agreeing that you are the leader - and that increases your teams efficiency in the race to develop your prototype. But the negatives are far too many. When investors think of the word CEO, what typically comes to their mind is a person experienced in taking companies from the startup stage to the exit stage. Furthermore, a having a CEO position filled indicates to them that a significant funding round is in place. If you are thinking that by giving yourself that title today you are positioning yourself for being the CEO post-funding, that is a false assumption. What is more likely is that at some stage in the companys evolution, an outsider will be better suited to take the company to the next level. Of course, there are many, many exceptions such as Dell, Bezos, etc. But rather than claim the CEO title at the onset, and subject yourself and future CEO candidates to unnecessary discomfort (we are seeking a CEO versus we are seeking to replace our CEO), let your funding stockholders make that decision. Whats most important is that your baby gets fundedavoid all barriers to that critical event.
prakster 20y ago
(Sorry about the weird characters..trying again) Suggest you remove "CEO" from your title. Having that word in your title has one, and only one, positive effect your co founders are agreeing that you are the leader - and that increases your teams efficiency in the race to develop your prototype. But the negatives are far too many. When investors think of the word CEO, what typically comes to their mind is a person experienced in taking companies from the startup stage to the exit stage. Furthermore, a having a CEO position filled indicates to them that a significant funding round is in place. If you are thinking that by giving yourself that title today you are positioning yourself for being the CEO post-funding, that is a false assumption. What is more likely is that at some stage in the companys evolution, an outsider will be better suited to take the company to the next level. Of course, there are many, many exceptions such as Dell, Bezos, etc. But rather than claim the CEO title at the onset, and subject yourself and future CEO candidates to unnecessary discomfort, (we are seeking a CEO versus we are seeking to replace our CEO), let your funding stockholders make that decision. Whats most important is that your baby gets fundedavoid all barriers to that critical event.
- mattculbreth 20y ago
  Yeah this was on my mind as well. Obviously thinking pretty far down the road but I guess that's the fun of it. So in that case what do you think of "President" or "Supreme Allied Commander"? Pros and cons I guess.
  - prakster 20y ago
    "President" is technically correct if you have a corporation, since every corporation must have a President and a Secretary (one person can be both). Your other choice may seem nice, but it will lead to more questions. Your best bet is to keep it simple for now and go with "Co-founder". As of right now, it's all noise anyway...what matters is the title given to your product by your users :-)

4 points by mattculbreth 20y ago

Co-Founder

What are most people calling themselves? We have three co-founders, one of whom runs the place. Right now we're going with: CEO, Co-Founder Co-Founder Co-Founder I can't decide if I like this or not, but I've seen it in quite a few places.

jwecker 20y ago
I think it works great. Everyone should always be prepared to wear multiple hats of course. It give you all a lot of flexibility when meeting and talking to other people / potential partners & affiliates / investors, etc.

gustaf 20y ago

We usually just use Co-founder, sometimes but rarely "CEO" and "Tech lead". What do you write on your business cards?

zaidf 20y ago

My biz cards to come will read: ceo / co-founder My partner: chief technology officer / co-founder -Zaid

goodgoblin 20y ago

I've given myself the title Executive Coffee Drinker, and my partner is the CIO - Chief Idea Officer. As for co-founder - I think it sounds a bit weak. Even if there are more than one founder, they can all be called Founder. Vice President's of other companies aren't called Co-Vice Presidents.

zaidf 20y ago
You're taking rules too literally:) Co-founder is a well accepted and used title. And like you say, co-vice presidents isn't and thus one is used and the other isn't.

prakster 20y ago

Suggest you remove "CEO" from your title. Having that word in your title has one, and only one, positive effect your co founders are agreeing that you are the leader - and that increases your teams efficiency in the race to develop your prototype. But the negatives are far too many. When investors think of the word CEO, what typically comes to their mind is a person experienced in taking companies from the startup stage to the exit stage. Furthermore, a having a CEO position filled indicates to them that a significant funding round is in place. If you are thinking that by giving yourself that title today you are positioning yourself for being the CEO post-funding, that is a false assumption. What is more likely is that at some stage in the companys evolution, an outsider will be better suited to take the company to the next level. Of course, there are many, many exceptions such as Dell, Bezos, etc. But rather than claim the CEO title at the onset, and subject yourself and future CEO candidates to unnecessary discomfort (we are seeking a CEO versus we are seeking to replace our CEO), let your funding stockholders make that decision. Whats most important is that your baby gets fundedavoid all barriers to that critical event.

prakster 20y ago

(Sorry about the weird characters..trying again) Suggest you remove "CEO" from your title. Having that word in your title has one, and only one, positive effect your co founders are agreeing that you are the leader - and that increases your teams efficiency in the race to develop your prototype. But the negatives are far too many. When investors think of the word CEO, what typically comes to their mind is a person experienced in taking companies from the startup stage to the exit stage. Furthermore, a having a CEO position filled indicates to them that a significant funding round is in place. If you are thinking that by giving yourself that title today you are positioning yourself for being the CEO post-funding, that is a false assumption. What is more likely is that at some stage in the companys evolution, an outsider will be better suited to take the company to the next level. Of course, there are many, many exceptions such as Dell, Bezos, etc. But rather than claim the CEO title at the onset, and subject yourself and future CEO candidates to unnecessary discomfort, (we are seeking a CEO versus we are seeking to replace our CEO), let your funding stockholders make that decision. Whats most important is that your baby gets fundedavoid all barriers to that critical event.

mattculbreth 20y ago
Yeah this was on my mind as well. Obviously thinking pretty far down the road but I guess that's the fun of it. So in that case what do you think of "President" or "Supreme Allied Commander"? Pros and cons I guess.
- prakster 20y ago
  "President" is technically correct if you have a corporation, since every corporation must have a President and a Secretary (one person can be both). Your other choice may seem nice, but it will lead to more questions. Your best bet is to keep it simple for now and go with "Co-founder". As of right now, it's all noise anyway...what matters is the title given to your product by your users :-)