Having organisations run by the original founders is often seen as an ideal situation. The founders have had the insight to see a gap, the passion to do something about it, and the dedication to put it all together. It may seem like the founder is the perfect person to lead the organisation for as long as they are willing and able. It’s not always true, though. There can be trouble with founders leading an organisation after a certain point. It’s called Founder’s Syndrome.
Imagine this: you were hired to run the volunteer team for a community food program. You matched people to roles that suited their skills, established a simple onboarding process, and volunteers started to feel at home. Then the founder drops in. She redirects volunteers mid-shift, contradicts your instructions, and assigns her friends to popular roles. Other volunteers start feeling like outsiders. Within a few months, most of your best volunteers stop showing up. Nobody complains. They just disappear.
It’s the old saying that “what got you here won’t get you there.” When an organisation is in it’s start-up phase there are rarely any staff, and the founder and their friends do most of the work. They make decisions based on what they see happening right at that moment. They seldom have a great deal of experience in the specific requirements of running a not-for-profit; they learn as they go. And the mistakes that they inevitably make are just part of the learning. And as they learn and grow, the organisation becomes part of their identity. Their baby. And like most parents, the founder sees themselves as the only one who really understands the organisation and its mission. They are the only one who knows what’s best for it.
And that works fine in the organisation’s infancy.
But organisations, like children, have a tendency to grow up. Needs change. Established organisations, even if they’re still grassroots, must have documented systems in place, rather than reactionary decisions made on the spot by the founder. It’s like a child entering school after the less formal learning that they had from their parents. Certainly parents can, and sometimes do, take charge of a child’s formal education. But to be successful, that education needs to become more “formal”, with established routines and metrics. When a founder is willing to establish (and follow) documented policies and procedures, and to set up systems to ensure consistency, objectivity and staff autonomy, they can be highly successful leading the organisation into the future.
The trouble with founders starts when they aren’t willing to let go. They hire staff but still make all the decisions. Onboarding processes are skipped because “I know the person and they’ll be great.” Certain volunteers are given the cold shoulder or edged out because the founder feels that they “don’t fit the culture.” These examples aren’t made up. I’ve seen them happen.
There are other problems with Founder’s Syndrome.
When a founder is too involved, staff and volunteers are less likely to speak up or express contradicting opinions, even if those opinions are backed by solid data. Meaning that inefficient systems remain inefficient, and barriers to involvement remain entrenched.
Founders are also less likely to adjust the mission to changing community needs. For example, the founder of an organisation I worked with refused to allow support to be given by different religious denominations, as they were originally started by a Christian group – even though the clients served were from many different cultures.
A study done at Walden University states that “Founders are oblivious to the impact of their behavior on the organisation…” In other words, they actively sabotage their mission without even knowing it.
So what can you do if this is happening in your organisation?
Start with collecting data. Documented facts are hard to argue with. “The standard error rate of our volunteers is 4%. The error rate of the volunteer you felt didn’t need training is 22%.” “The national retention rate for foodbank volunteers is 82%. Our retention rate is 45%.” If instead you approach the conversation with “I feel undermined,” or “the volunteers are confused about the leadership of the program,” it becomes easy to get around.
Once the facts are on the table, make suggestions on what you’d like to see happen to fix the issue, and ask the founder for their input on specific sections of it. Make them feel as though they are still in control, but keep the important items in your own hands. It takes tact, but it can make a real difference in how easily you can get changes through.
Finally, know when to leave. To be honest, sometimes the founder’s behaviour is too engrained, and the safest thing for your mental health is to exit the environment.
You’re not alone if you have trouble with founders.
Founder’s Syndrome is a common and challenging issue, especially in smaller, grassroots organisations. If you approach it with tact and delicacy, though, you can often – not always, but often – work through it and build the volunteer program your mission deserves. Good luck!
