Article

The Board Trap: What Founders Want vs. What They Need

July 4, 2025

It’s late on a Thursday evening. A startup founder, let’s call him Alex, sits alone in his dimly lit office, staring at the screen filled with investor emails, recent board meeting notes, and a looming sense of anxiety. Despite a growing market presence, promising early metrics, and investor enthusiasm, Alex feels increasingly isolated. His board meetings are cordial, even friendly, yet he leaves each one with a nagging sense that something critical is missing. Alex is facing what countless startup founders encounter: the gap between what he wants to hear from his board and what he actually needs. More troubling, he’s realizing the uncomfortable truth that what he often gets from his board might be the very opposite of helpful.



The Comforting Echo Chamber

Like most founders, Alex needs a bit of encouragement. He appreciates when board members praise his vision, validate his strategy, and highlight early successes. Founders crave affirmation because it fuels their drive through the rollercoaster of startup life. Hearing “You're on the right track,” or “Keep doing what you're doing,” feels good and seems helpful—at least at first. But when such praise becomes generic cheerleading, it ceases to help. Boards that offer vague encouragement without specific, candid insights inadvertently trap founders like Alex in an echo chamber. Without real feedback, he can’t discern his blind spots—areas where critical weaknesses could quietly undermine his growth trajectory. This often manifests as a reluctance to deliver tough messages, leaving founders unaware of crucial issues that could impact their success.


Micromanagement Disguised as Support

Equally problematic are board members who swing too far in the opposite direction, moving beyond strategic oversight into operational micromanagement. Every founder knows the frustration of having board members who, despite good intentions, involve themselves too deeply in day-to-day decisions, weakening the founder’s authority and autonomy. Alex’s board sometimes means well, but when a key investor repeatedly intervenes to question his decisions on product features, marketing strategies, or even team hires, he begins to doubt himself. Micromanagement erodes confidence, disrupts clear accountability, and ultimately hampers execution, which is ironic because execution is precisely where many founders already struggle. This constant questioning of operational decisions can stifle a founder's ability to lead and innovate.


The Danger of Ambiguous Expectations

Another persistent issue Alex faces is the ambiguity around what his board truly expects. Clear, objective expectations from the board are crucial for founder success. However, many investors unintentionally avoid specificity, setting vague or shifting goalposts that confuse rather than clarify. Without clear performance criteria, founders are left guessing, constantly uncertain about whether their strategies align with investor expectations. Ambiguity creates chronic anxiety and undermines founders' confidence. Worse yet, ambiguous expectations can lead to misalignment on strategic goals, causing founders to chase short-term validation rather than sustainable, long-term growth. This lack of clarity can lead to wasted effort and misdirected priorities.


The Need for Tough Love

Your board shouldn’t just be your fan club—it needs to be your coach. Effective boards must deliver constructive, direct, and sometimes uncomfortable truths. Alex, despite his discomfort, desperately needs his board to candidly highlight his developmental gaps—areas like delegation, short-term planning, accountability, or conflict management. Yet, in practice, board members frequently avoid these tough conversations, sidestepping critical feedback to maintain harmony or to avoid confrontation. Founders are left unaware or in denial about key weaknesses that urgently need attention. A board’s hesitance to challenge its founder creates blind spots that can jeopardize the startup’s viability at critical inflection points. The willingness to deliver "tough love" is essential for a founder's personal and professional growth.


Why Systematic Evaluations Are Non-Negotiable

Alex’s board rarely provides structured evaluations. This isn't uncommon. Surprisingly few startup boards implement regular, formal performance assessments of their CEOs. Without this structure, Alex receives sporadic, anecdotal feedback that's often subjective and unhelpful. Your board should commit to regular, structured evaluations that provide clear benchmarks and developmental insights. Such evaluations aren't just formalities—they're vital tools for leadership growth. Alex, like most founders, needs a transparent, systematic approach that explicitly lays out how he’s doing, where he excels, and exactly what needs improvement. This provides founders with concrete data points for improvement and recognizes their strengths.


Leverage or Lose the Network

Investors often promise founders access to their networks. In reality, many founders find those promises hollow. Alex, initially thrilled by the potential connections promised by his investors, now finds his board reluctant or slow to make meaningful introductions. Connections to customers, strategic partners, funding sources, and talent are critical for early-stage companies. Boards that fail to leverage their networks deprive founders of essential resources needed to scale. A board's network can open doors that would otherwise remain closed to a young startup.


Short-Term Pressure vs. Long-Term Vision

A major frustration founders like Alex feel is when boards become overly obsessed with short-term wins, losing sight of long-term strategic objectives. Investors focused solely on immediate returns inadvertently push founders toward reactive, tactical decisions rather than deliberate, strategic growth. Alex’s board frequently pressures him for rapid user growth and immediate profitability metrics that, while appealing in quarterly reviews, can compromise sustainable business strategies. Effective boards balance urgent priorities with long-term strategic vision, guiding founders toward decisions that position the company for lasting success. This strategic balance is crucial for sustained growth and avoiding a treadmill of short-term fixes.


Poor Onboarding and Board Dynamics

Alex’s frustration began from day one, during a poor onboarding experience. His board, eager to dive into immediate challenges, neglected systematic orientation. Alex, like many founders, finds himself navigating unclear expectations, hidden dynamics, and unexplained board norms, leading to confusion and inefficiency. Good boards invest heavily in onboarding, clearly establishing expectations, governance procedures, and communication norms. Without this clarity, founders waste precious energy decoding board expectations, rather than focusing fully on running their business. A well-structured onboarding process sets the stage for a productive and trusting board-founder relationship.


Communication Failures and Board Passivity

Perhaps the most pervasive issue Alex faces is board passivity—boards that fail to engage actively, question rigorously, or hold him accountable effectively. Passive boards become rubber-stamping bodies, missing critical strategic oversights and reducing governance to a superficial exercise. Moreover, poor responsiveness from investors—late replies, vague answers, and irregular engagement—creates uncertainty and disrupts timely decision-making, undermining the founder-board relationship. Effective governance demands consistent engagement, rigorous questioning, and candid dialogue. An engaged board is a vital asset, providing critical oversight and support.


The Trust Factor

Finally, the bedrock of effective founder-board dynamics is trust—genuine, mutual trust built on empathy, respect, and honest dialogue. Unfortunately, transactional and impersonal relationships are common. Alex increasingly senses his board views him merely as an asset rather than a partner. When boards fail to genuinely empathize with the intense personal and emotional toll founders face, trust diminishes, communication deteriorates, and the board-founder relationship becomes adversarial rather than supportive. Building a foundation of trust is paramount for a truly collaborative and effective partnership.


Closing the Gap

If you're a founder reading this, the good news is awareness is the first step toward bridging the gap between what you want to hear and what you actually need. Demand transparency, structured feedback, clear expectations, and active engagement from your board.

If you're an investor or board member, understand the urgency and necessity of providing clear, actionable, and candid support. Embrace structured evaluations, leverage your networks proactively, balance short-term demands with long-term vision, and above all, commit to building trust and empathy with your founders.

In short, boards should be less cheerleader and more coach, less micromanager and more strategic partner. Founders must learn to welcome—even demand—the uncomfortable truths essential for their growth. Alex’s late-night realization is powerful: the health of his startup depends not on hearing pleasant platitudes, but on receiving actionable truths. It’s uncomfortable—but essential. His success, and yours, depends upon it.


share this

Related Articles

Related Articles

Why composure beats charisma.
By Rich Hagberg October 28, 2025
The Charisma Illusion Charisma gets all the press. It fills conference rooms, wins funding rounds, and dominates the LinkedIn highlight reel. We treat it like the gold standard of leadership — as if volume equals vision. But charisma is a sugar high. It spikes energy, then crashes trust. Composure, on the other hand — quiet, grounded, centered composure — is the kind of influence that lasts. It doesn’t light up a room; it settles one. When things go sideways, it’s not the charismatic leader people look for. It’s the calm one. The Crisis Test Picture this. The product just failed. The client’s furious. Your team’s pacing like trapped cats. Two leaders walk in. One storms into action — loud, fast, “What the hell happened here?” The other walks in slowly, looks around, and says, “Okay, let’s breathe. What do we know so far?” The first one gets attention. The second one gets results. That’s emotional geometry — the calmest person in the room reshapes everyone else’s state. Why Calm Is the Real Power When you stay composed, you’re not just managing your emotions — you’re regulating the entire system. Here’s the neuroscience behind it: people mirror the nervous system of whoever has the most authority. If you’re grounded, they sync to your rhythm. If you’re frantic, they sync to that instead. You don’t need to lecture anyone on resilience. You just have to model it. It’s not charisma that makes people trust you; it’s the quiet sense that you’re not going to lose your mind when things get hard. Charisma’s Half-Life Charisma is a spark. It can ignite a team — but if there’s no composure beneath it, the whole thing burns out. You’ve seen this movie before: the leader who rallies everyone with a passionate all-hands speech, then disappears into reaction mode when things get messy. Charisma without composure is like caffeine without sleep. You’re awake, but you’re not steady. Composure doesn’t get the applause. It gets the loyalty. A Founder’s Story One founder I worked with — I’ll call him David — was known for being a “high-voltage” guy. He could pitch an investor, fire up a crowd, or talk anyone into anything. But his team? They were walking on eggshells. His energy filled every room, but it left no oxygen for anyone else. During one session, I asked, “When you raise your voice, what happens to theirs?” He went quiet. That was the moment he understood that his passion — the thing he was most proud of — had become the team’s anxiety. A year later, his team described him differently: “He’s still intense, but steady. We trust him more now.” He didn’t lose charisma; he layered it with composure. The Calm Before the Influence Here’s what composure actually looks like: You listen longer. Because real influence starts with attention, not argument. You breathe before reacting. That pause isn’t weakness; it’s power management. You let silence do the work. Charisma fills every space; composure creates space for others to step in. You own your tone. You realize your sighs, your speed, your face — they’re all communication tools whether you intend them or not. You choose steadiness over certainty. People don’t need you to know everything. They just need to know you’re okay not knowing. Funny But True A client once told me, “When I’m calm in a meeting, people assume I’m hiding something.” I said, “Good. Let them wonder.” That’s how unfamiliar calm has become. In some cultures, composure looks radical — even suspicious. But it’s exactly what people crave in a world that never shuts up. Why Charisma Is Easier (and More Addictive) Charisma gets feedback. You see the energy rise, you feel the applause. It’s visible. Composure feels invisible — until you lose it. No one thanks you for staying calm during a crisis. But they remember it when deciding whether to follow you into the next one. That’s why maturity in leadership means getting comfortable with the quiet wins — the meeting that didn’t spiral, the argument that didn’t happen, the team that stayed focused because you did. The Emotional Geometry in Practice Think of composure as geometry because emotions move through space. When you enter a room, you alter its emotional shape. If you radiate calm, people’s shoulders drop. Their thinking widens. They start contributing. If you radiate stress, the room contracts. People shrink. Ideas vanish. Influence isn’t what you say. It’s the energy field you create. Your Challenge This Week Before your next high-stakes meeting, pause outside the door. Take one deep breath and ask yourself: What energy does this room need from me right now? Then bring only that. Nothing more. You’ll be amazed how fast everything slows down when you do. Final Word Charisma captures attention. Composure builds trust. One is about how loudly you shine; the other is about how steadily you glow. The leader who can stay centered when everyone else is spinning doesn’t just have influence — they are the influence.  And that’s the kind of power that never burns out.
October 25, 2025
It usually starts with a familiar scene. A founder at a whiteboard, marker in hand, speaking with the conviction of someone who can see the future before anyone else does. The team leans in. The idea feels inevitable. Confidence fills the room. That’s the moment when narcissism looks like leadership. For a while, it is. Until it isn’t. The Hidden Engine Behind Ambition Every founder carries a trace of narcissism. You need it to survive the impossible odds of building something from nothing. It’s the oxygen of early-stage ambition — the irrational belief that you can win when every signal says you can’t. But narcissism isn’t a single trait. It’s a spectrum — and the version that fuels creativity early on often morphs into the one that burns teams, investors, and reputations later. The Six Faces of Narcissism Psychologist Dr. Ramani Durvasula , whose research has shaped much of the modern understanding of narcissism, describes six primary subtypes. Each of them can be adaptive when balanced, or toxic when unregulated: Grandiose: The charismatic visionary. Inspires others when confident; crushes dissent when insecure. Vulnerable: The emotionally fragile version. Craves validation but fears rejection. Communal: The “good person” narcissist. Needs to be admired for being generous or kind. Malignant: Controlling, paranoid, and willing to harm others to protect ego. Neglectful: Detached, disengaged, treats people as instruments. Self-Righteous: Morally superior, rigid, convinced they are the only adult in the room. Most founders show traces of at least two of these. And in moderation, these traits help. They create drive, resilience, and belief — qualities that investors often mistake for charisma. The problem isn’t narcissism itself. It’s when ego outpaces emotional regulation . The Data Behind the Mirror Across our database of 122 startup founders , each assessed on 46 Personality & Leadership Profile (PLP) scales and 46 360-degree leadership competencies , narcissism emerges as both a predictor of greatness and a predictor of collapse . The 10× founders — those whose companies returned exponential value — were not humble saints. They were what I call disciplined narcissists: confident, ambitious, assertive, and driven by achievement — but tempered by empathy, patience, and ethical grounding . They scored high on Achievement, Autonomy, and Risk-Taking , but also maintained elevated scores on Patience, Optimism, and Model of Values . They didn’t fight their ego. They harnessed it. By contrast, founders whose companies failed — the unsuccessful group — were equally brilliant but emotionally unregulated. They scored significantly higher on Aggression, Defensiveness, and Impulsivity , and significantly lower on Trust, Empathy, and Consideration — roughly one standard deviation lower (10 T-score points) than their successful peers. Their leadership wasn’t powered by vision anymore — it was powered by reactivity. And that’s the moment when the very engine that got them to the starting line begins to tear the vehicle apart. When Narcissism Works Healthy narcissism gives founders gravity. It creates the magnetic field that pulls investors, employees, and customers into orbit. These founders are confident but not careless; assertive but not controlling. They operate from belief, not from fear. They’re the ones who use narcissism to build something enduring — not to prove something fleeting. In our data, they excelled in 360 ratings on Creating Buy-In, Delegation & Empowerment, and Adaptability — all behaviors that require trust and composure. They convert ego into execution. Their signature behaviors: Grandiose energy channeled into purpose. Malignant competitiveness transmuted into persistence. Vulnerability transformed into openness and reflection. Self-Righteous conviction turned into moral consistency. They’re still narcissists — but their narcissism serves the mission, not their self-image. When Narcissism Fails Then there are the others — the unregulated narcissists. At first, they look similar: bold, persuasive, unstoppable. But over time, their self-belief becomes brittle. Their aggression rises as trust falls. Their perfectionism becomes paranoia. Their autonomy becomes isolation. These founders scored roughly a full standard deviation lower (10 T-score points) than successful ones on 360 measures like Openness to Input, Relationship Building, Coaching, and Emotional Control . They don’t fail because they’re arrogant. They fail because they can’t tolerate limitation. Feedback feels like rejection. Delegation feels like loss of control. And the more power they get, the less self-awareness they have. They move fast, but the faster they go, the lonelier it gets — until the organization collapses under the weight of their unmet emotional needs. The Two Versions of the Same Founder Ego Regulation • Successful Founders: Confidence moderated by reflection and humility • Unsuccessful Founders: Volatility disguised as confidence Control vs. Trust • Successful Founders: Delegates, empowers, shares power • Unsuccessful Founders: Micromanages, distrusts, isolates Aggression Pattern • Successful Founders: Channeled into performance • Unsuccessful Founders: Expressed as conflict and coercion Recognition Need • Successful Founders: Purpose-driven validation • Unsuccessful Founders: Insecure approval-seeking Ethical Compass • Successful Founders: Consistent moral modeling • Unsuccessful Founders: Expedience and rationalization So the dividing line isn’t how much narcissism a founder has — it’s whether it’s anchored by self-awareness . The successful ones use ego as a tool. The unsuccessful ones use it as armor. The Spectrum of Founder Narcissism Grandiose • Healthy Expression: Charisma, conviction, inspiration • Unhealthy Expression: Arrogance, dominance, fragility Vulnerable • Healthy Expression: Self-reflective, emotionally transparent • Unhealthy Expression: Defensive, insecure, blaming Communal • Healthy Expression: Empathy without ego • Unhealthy Expression: Performative caring Malignant • Healthy Expression: Fierce but principled • Unhealthy Expression: Punitive, controlling, distrustful Neglectful • Healthy Expression: Independent but connected • Unhealthy Expression: Detached, emotionally absent Self-Righteous • Healthy Expression: Grounded in values • Unhealthy Expression: Rigid, moralizing, unyielding Every founder oscillates along this continuum. The goal isn’t to eliminate ego but to integrate it — to move from self-importance to self-awareness. The Psychological Root The most successful founders in our research share a quiet humility beneath their confidence. They’ve learned to hold two truths simultaneously: “I am extraordinary.” “I am not the whole story.” That paradox — ego with empathy, conviction with curiosity — is the hallmark of psychological maturity. It’s what allows a founder to hold power without being consumed by it. Their unsuccessful counterparts can’t hold that tension. They oscillate between superiority and shame — between “I’m brilliant” and “No one appreciates me.” That oscillation is the engine of the vulnerable-malignant loop , the psychological pattern that wrecks both cultures and companies. Coaching the Narcissist You can’t coach ego out of a founder. But you can coach ego regulation . The process usually unfolds in five stages: Recognition: Data first, not judgment. Use 360 feedback as an emotional mirror. Narcissists can argue with people; they can’t argue with their own data. Differentiation: Separate ambition from insecurity. Help them see what’s driving their overcontrol. Containment: Teach behavioral discipline — pausing before reacting, curiosity before correction. Connection: Reinforce trust-based leadership behaviors — active listening, recognition, and collaborative decision-making. Integration: Replace ego-defense with ego-service — using their confidence to develop others rather than dominate them. The shift doesn’t happen overnight. But when it does, the founder becomes more than a leader — they become a force multiplier. The Paradox in Plain Language Our forty years of data say something simple but profound: Every founder who builds something meaningful begins with narcissism. But only those who grow beyond it sustain success. Ego, when integrated, becomes conviction. Ego, when unintegrated, becomes compulsion. One builds. The other burns. Or, as I often tell founders: Narcissism builds the rocket. Empathy keeps it from burning up on re-entry. That isn’t metaphor. That’s psychology — and physics. Because unchecked ego obeys the same law as gravity: It always pulls you back down.
Why thinking time is the most undervalued executive skill.
By Rich Hagberg October 21, 2025
The Badge of Busyness If there were an Olympic event for back-to-back meetings, most executives I know would medal. They wear it proudly — the calendar that looks like a Tetris board, the 11:30 p.m. emails, the constant refrain of “crazy week.” Busyness has become our favorite drug. It keeps us numb, important, and conveniently distracted from the one question we don’t want to face: What am I actually doing that matters? I’m not judging; I’ve lived this. Years ago, I was “that guy” — sprinting through 14-hour days while telling myself reflection was for monks or consultants between clients. Then one day, after a particularly pointless meeting, I realized something embarrassing: I couldn’t remember the last time I’d had a single original thought. Why Thinking Feels Unproductive Here’s the irony: most leaders know they need to think more. They just can’t stand how useless it feels. Sitting in silence doesn’t produce slides or metrics. There’s no dopamine hit, no “good meeting” to log. But thinking time is like compound interest. It looks small in the moment and enormous over time. When you actually stop, patterns appear. You notice which fires you keep putting out, which meetings could’ve been emails, and which goals you’re chasing that don’t even belong to you anymore. A Simple Truth Busyness is a form of self-defense. If you never stop moving, you never have to confront the uncomfortable truths that surface when you do. That’s why reflection feels awkward at first — it threatens your illusion of momentum. But momentum without direction is just noise. A Founder’s Story One founder I coached had the classic startup badge of honor: chaos. His day started at 5:30 a.m., ended around midnight, and he bragged about being “in the weeds” with every decision. I asked, “When do you think?” He said, “All the time.” I said, “No — I mean deliberately.” He stared at me like I’d asked if he did yoga with dolphins. We scheduled two hours of thinking time a week. The first few sessions drove him nuts. He kept checking email, pacing, making lists. Then, around week four, he sent a note: “I finally realized half my problems were the result of not thinking before saying yes.” That’s the power of reflection — it turns self-inflicted chaos into clarity. The Science Behind Stillness Here’s the biology of it: when you’re rushing, your brain lives in survival mode — flooded with cortisol, locked on what’s urgent. When you slow down, another network kicks in — the one responsible for creativity, empathy, and pattern recognition. That’s why your best ideas show up in the shower or on long drives. The brain finally has enough quiet to connect dots. You don’t need more input. You need more oxygen. Why Leaders Avoid It Two reasons. It’s vulnerable. Reflection forces you to notice things you’ve been ignoring — the conversation you keep postponing, the hire you know isn’t working, the ambition that’s turned into exhaustion. It’s inefficient… at first. There’s no immediate ROI. But over time, reflection prevents the expensive rework that comes from impulsive decisions. As one client told me, “I used to say I didn’t have time to think. Turns out, not thinking was costing me time.” How to Reclaim Thinking Time (Without Quitting Your Job) Schedule “white space” like a meeting. Literally block it on the calendar. Call it “Strategy,” “Clarity,” or even “Meeting with Myself” if you’re worried someone will book over it. Change environments. Go walk, drive, sit somewhere with natural light. Different settings unlock different neural pathways. Ask bigger questions. Instead of “What needs to get done?” ask “What actually matters now?” or “What am I pretending not to know?” Capture patterns, not notes. Don’t transcribe thoughts — notice themes. What keeps repeating? That’s your mind begging for attention. End reflection with one action. Otherwise, it turns into rumination. Decide one thing to start, stop, or say no to. The Humor in It I once told an overworked exec, “Block 90 minutes a week just to think.” He said, “What should I do during that time?” That’s the problem in one sentence. Thinking is doing — it’s just quieter. What Happens When You Build the Habit At first, reflection feels indulgent. Then it feels useful. Then it becomes addictive — in a good way. Your decisions get cleaner. Your conversations sharper. Your stress lower. You stop reacting and start designing. Because clarity saves more time than hustle ever will. Your Challenge This Week Find one 60-minute window. No phone, no laptop, no music, no distractions. Just a notebook and a question: “What’s one thing I keep doing that no longer deserves my energy?” Don’t overthink it — just listen for what surfaces. That hour will tell you more about your leadership than a dozen status meetings ever could. Final Word In a world obsessed with movement, stillness is rebellion. But it’s also intelligence. The best leaders aren’t the busiest. They’re the ones who’ve learned that reflection isn’t retreat — it’s refinement. The next breakthrough won’t come from another meeting. It’ll come from the silence you’ve been avoiding. 
ALL ARTICLES