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

e
By Rich Hagberg August 9, 2025
Introduction: The Brutal Truth About Change If you’re leading a company, here’s one brutal truth you can’t dodge: resistance to change isn’t just inevitable—it’s a gift. Most leaders don’t see it that way. They treat it like an obstacle to bulldoze, something to out-argue, out-maneuver, or silence. But resistance, if you know how to read it, is a living, breathing diagnostic tool. Every objection, every sideways comment in a hallway, every moment of awkward silence in a meeting—it’s all data. It tells you where the trust gaps are, where the communication breakdowns have happened, and where your people’s unspoken fears live. If you ignore that data, you’re flying blind. The hard numbers back this up: more than 70% of organizational change initiatives fail, not because the strategy was flawed, but because leaders underestimated what it would take to guide people through the emotional turbulence of transformation. If you want your next big initiative to succeed, the shift starts here: stop seeing resistance as the enemy, and start listening to what it’s telling you. When you do, you’ll discover that resistance isn’t a wall to break down—it’s a map showing you exactly where to go next. 1. Rethink Resistance: It’s Data, Not Defiance Let’s flip the lens. When people resist, they’re rarely doing it for sport. They’re sending up flares. They’re telling you something’s unclear, untested, or untrusted. For example, I worked with a CEO rolling out a sweeping technology overhaul. His first instinct when his managers hesitated was frustration—until we sat down and dissected the resistance. It turned out the managers weren’t doubting the technology; they were worried about the gap between the training timeline and the rollout date. They didn’t fear change—they feared being set up to fail.  When you stop labeling resistance as “non-compliance” and start treating it like intelligence gathering, you find it points to the very levers you can pull to move the change forward.
How
By Rich Hagberg August 1, 2025
Most startup founders are brilliant at innovation, disruption, and blazing new trails. They're visionaries, incredibly driven, and fiercely independent. Unfortunately, those same powerful traits often sabotage their ability to foster genuine collaboration—a critical ingredient in startup success. I've spent decades coaching founders, and one of the biggest blind spots I've observed is the gap between what founders naturally do well and what's required to create truly collaborative cultures. Understanding these tendencies—and knowing how to counter them—can mean the difference between startup stagnation and breakout growth. High Independence, Low Collaboration Founders thrive on independence. They love breaking rules, ignoring boundaries, and pushing limits. But independence can quickly morph into isolation. The very idea of slowing down to seek consensus or accommodate team input feels restrictive, even suffocating. Implications: This independent streak inadvertently sidelines team members, suppresses input, and reduces engagement. Talented people quickly learn their ideas don't matter, and teams become passive or defensive. Actions to Counter: Practice deliberately inclusive decision-making. Clearly define which decisions you'll make alone and where you'll solicit team input. Regularly check in to see if team members feel heard and involved. Dominance Isn’t Always Dominant Many founders naturally take a commanding stance. Their assertiveness, directness, and forcefulness can spark initial progress but, over time, it creates resistance. When team members feel steamrolled or fearful of speaking up, creativity vanishes. Implications: A dominant style shuts down communication, makes feedback difficult, and kills the very collaboration needed for sustained innovation. Actions to Counter: Make intentional space for quieter team members to speak. Foster psychological safety by modeling vulnerability and humility Balance assertiveness with curiosity—actively seek feedback rather than waiting for it. The Curse of Poor Delegation Delegation isn't just handing off tasks—it's handing off trust. But founders notoriously struggle with this, often believing only they can execute properly. Every task not delegated reinforces the message that the team isn’t capable. Implications: Poor delegation creates bottlenecks, slows execution, and demoralizes talented employees who feel undervalued and micromanaged. Actions to Counter: Start small by delegating lower-risk tasks clearly and thoroughly. Regularly check your impulses to micromanage; remind yourself why you hired capable people. Invest in mentoring and coaching rather than controlling. Communication Breakdown Founders are famously impatient. They think fast, act fast, and often communicate quickly or incompletely. What seems obvious to them might be totally unclear to their team. Implications: Poor communication creates ambiguity, confusion, and frustration, grinding collaboration to a halt. Teams waste energy guessing expectations rather than innovating. Actions to Counter: Slow down to clearly articulate the "why" behind your decisions. Confirm understanding by asking team members to reflect back their interpretations. Regularly solicit feedback on your communication style and clarity. Arrogance: The Silent Collaboration Killer Confidence is crucial. But confidence unchecked can veer into arrogance, leading founders to dismiss feedback, overlook critical insights, and alienate key contributors. Implications: Arrogance destroys trust, stifles dialogue, and creates a toxic environment where collaboration is impossible. Actions to Counter: Intentionally invite critique and respond openly and constructively. Regularly acknowledge your mistakes publicly to model humility. Actively seek alternative viewpoints before finalizing decisions. Conflict Avoidance (or Aggression) Many founders fall into two extreme camps: conflict avoiders or conflict initiators. Both extremes are deadly to collaboration. Avoiding conflict leaves critical issues unresolved. Aggressive conflict handling creates resentment and fear. Implications: Poorly managed conflict erodes team cohesion, undermines trust, and can spiral into prolonged dysfunction. Actions to Counter: Establish clear, structured conflict resolution processes. Practice direct yet respectful conflict conversations. Use neutral facilitation for emotionally charged discussions. Systems Thinking vs. Reactive Planning Startups prize agility and adaptability. But too much short-term thinking neglects the processes and structures that sustain collaboration. Without clear systems, teams fall into chaos. Implications: Reactive planning leads to burnout, inefficiency, and frustration as team members constantly fight fires rather than building strategically. Actions to Counter: Balance short-term agility with consistent investment in systems and clear processes. Regularly revisit and improve structures as your company scales. Empower process-oriented thinkers in your organization to build effective systems. Workaholism and Burnout Culture Founders set the pace. But when founders turn workaholic, they unknowingly create an environment of exhaustion, anxiety, and diminished psychological safety. Exhausted teams are seldom collaborative. Implications: Productivity drops, innovation dries up, and talented employees start to leave. Actions to Counter: Actively model sustainable work-life balance. Publicly recognize and reward collaborative, balanced behaviors. Regularly monitor signs of burnout and intervene early. Ambiguity Isn’t Always Your Friend Founders typically tolerate ambiguity better than most. But your team needs clarity and direction. Too much ambiguity creates stress and undermines collaborative execution. Implications: Team paralysis, lack of initiative, and increased frustration. Actions to Counter: Clearly define roles, responsibilities, and expectations. Regularly ask your team what clarity they need to be effective. Balance your tolerance for ambiguity with your team’s genuine need for guidance. The Collaboration Paradox Founders face a paradox. The same traits that fuel their success—independence, assertiveness, rapid execution—also sabotage the collaborative environments crucial for scaling. Acknowledging this paradox is the first step. The second is intentionally adopting behaviors that might feel unnatural at first: fostering inclusive communication, delegating with trust, managing conflict constructively, investing in systems thinking, and balancing your independent streak with genuine empathy.  The good news? These skills are learnable. Great founders don’t have to become entirely different people; they simply need to expand their toolkit. Start today by picking just one area and committing to small, consistent improvements. Your team and your startup—will thank you.
The Recognition Paradox: 
Why Truly Outstanding Leaders Thrive by Indifference to Personal Glory
By Rich Hagberg July 31, 2025
The Recognition Paradox: Why Truly Outstanding Leaders Thrive by Indifference to Personal Glory
ALL ARTICLES