Article
The Leader’s Evolving Role in Working Through Others
August 13, 2020
There are no leaders without followers. It's about leverage

The Leader’s Evolving Role in Working Through Others
In the beginning, during the organization’s early stage of growth, the leader may play many roles. It’s quite natural to wear many hats and attempt to take on a wide range of responsibilities, and for a while that may work. It may be both expedient and cost effective in the short run, but not in the long run!
You can’t do everything. As the organization grows, you will come to the realization that you can’t be an expert in all the areas essential to the growth and effectiveness of the company. You can’t take charge of engineering, sales, finance, product, marketing, and so on. It’s neither effective, nor, as the organization grows, possible. Entrepreneurs must get beyond the belief that they can and should have their hand into every part of the company. You need to bring in people who have expertise in different domains and let them lead those teams and functions.
Grow from working in the company to working on the company. In sports terms, players sometimes go from being a player, to a player-coach, and finally to being the coach. You may start out writing code, continue to lead product development, but also facilitate teamwork, build a company culture, begin to give people direction and devise and implement a strategic plan, negotiate additional funding with venture capitalists for the destiny of the organization: you are working ON the company rather than IN the company.
This is a huge transition for most people, and it is not easy. Many young tech entrepreneurs, accustomed to working creatively on their own, have never had the experience of working on a successful team or working with an effective leader. Many derive their sense of self-worth from being a “doer” and accomplishing something tangible every day. This could make it difficult to let go of details and tasks that make you feel you have done something concrete and useful. This feeling can make you reluctant to let go and “just lead”. So, to shift from being the one who is focused on task accomplishment, who solves tangible problems and makes all the decisions to seeing yourself as the one who facilitates change and works primarily or even completely through others is a major step. As leader you must accept that you are no longer just a doer but instead, someone whose role is motivating, focusing and involving, getting input and buy-in and working indirectly to get things done.
“Roberto needs to move from a position of chief doer to a position where he guides and facilitates teams and groups to proactively drive the business using team member’s own expertise and giving them a high degree of autonomy.”
In short, as the organization evolves, the leader’s role also needs to evolve. The leader continues to play an important role but his or her individual contribution is increasingly replaced by team building skills and facilitating the collective contributions of the team.
I remember well a coaching session with a very young, inexperienced CEO who started a company that had only 11 people when I began our engagement, but who saw his company growing dramatically. He opened our conversation by saying, “I’m depressed because I don’t know what I should be doing. I don’t feel I’m adding value anymore. I used to write code and get involved in managing projects but now my team has grown and I’m spending my time doing things that I don’t see as having tangible value.” I pointed out to him that his role was now to be the leader, the direction setter, the motivator, the communicator, the facilitator of teamwork and the builder of culture. I said, “It’s not the same mountain, but a different mountain to climb, and a whole new challenge in learning to play a new role.”
His self-esteem had come from being a doer, and he had no concept of what it meant to be a leader and a CEO. It was a whole new ballgame now. But he learned well: The company, that he started with college roommates, now has 400 employees and is highly successful. They’ve had seven rounds of funding that brought in over 200 million dollars. (it’s now seven years later.)
Evolution of Your Role as Leader. In their book, Leading at the Speed of Growth, Katherine Catlin and Jana Matthews delineate four main stages in the growth of an organization:
- Startup
- Initial Growth
- Rapid Growth
- Continuous Growth
At each stage, the role of the leader shifts. In the Startup phase, you are an active Doer and primary Decision Maker. But as the fledgling organization starts to take off in its Initial Growth phase, hires more people and expands, you need to cut back on some of your “doing” activities in order to become the chief Delegator as well as the Direction Setter. In the third stage, as the company scales due to Rapid Growth, your role must shift to being a Team Builder, Coach, Planner, and Communicator (both internally and to the public). Finally, in the phase of Continuous Growth, the leader becomes Change Catalyst, Strategic Innovator, Chief of Culture, and overall Organization Builder.
These roles are qualitatively quite different. To maintain effective leadership as the organization progresses from one stage to the next, you’ll need to change with it, being willing to leave behind attitudes and behaviors that worked quite well at one stage but are no longer optimum as the organization scales.
Become a facilitator of collaboration and success. Use your team for collaborative, synergistic problem-solving. Stop trying to control every decision. The leader sets the tone on an executive team. As the leader, you must help the team work together effectively, resolve conflicts, support one another, solve problems, and make decisions efficiently as a group. For this, team members need to trust each other and communicate openly. As the leader it’s your role to make this happen.
If the leader has surrounded him/herself with team members who have complementary skills, strengths, experience, and perspectives, great things can begin to happen. A key role of the leader is to guide, support, and facilitate effective team processes and interactions to get the most out of the synergy from the team. The leader needs to be sure the team is focused and aligned.
Get everyone aligned around a common sense of purpose. It is also vital to foster a common sense of purpose and identity around the mission and create a safe, supportive, open environment where differences are resolved, and problems and decisions are worked through effectively. It’s the leader’s role to get everyone working together and not let competition, ego battles and silo mentality destroy teamwork and hamper the organization’s ability to grow and thrive.
Challenge people to be and do their best. Along with fostering a supportive work environment, the leader needs to challenge individuals and teams to raise the bar, not to settle for mediocre or “okay” but to be the best they can be. He or she has to walk the line between being supportive and encouraging on one hand, and challenging people to be accountable for outcomes. Not everybody is going to produce top-quality results. Some people are lazy and want to just "get by," but as the leader that has to be unacceptable to you. Ultimately, you will be held accountable for what the team accomplishes or does not accomplish. So sometimes you may need to put on a taskmaster’s hat, express the expectation that your people will put forth their best effort, and be as demanding of results as the situation requires. The best leaders I have worked with over the years have been a blend or combination of demanding and supportive.
Respond to the need of the time. The best leaders are also attuned to the ever-changing business climate, as well as the social, macro-economic, and political trends, any or all of which could influence the direction and success of the business. Different times and conditions call for different styles of leadership.
For example, in recent years, Andreessen Horowitz co-founder and CEO Ben Horowitz drew a useful contrast between what he called a Wartime CEO and a Peacetime CEO. In Peacetime (by which he means when the company has a strong competitive edge and its market is growing) leadership can afford to deploy the company’s strengths to expand in creative directions. When Google found itself with a near-monopoly in the search market, they asked employees to spend 20% of their time on creative ideas to grow the company in new directions. Peacetime leadership can comfortably allocate time to nurturing team cohesion and individual creative expression. These are times when “delegation,” “don’t micromanage,” and so on can be emphasized by the leader.
In Wartime, however, when the company is under pressure to become profitable, or it is facing severe competitive threat and its very survival may be at stake, the entire focus has to be on alignment behind the organization’s mission. Horowitz cites the example of Steve Jobs’ return to a struggling Apple, which was literally a few weeks away from bankruptcy. Jobs “needed everyone to move with precision and follow his exact plan; there was no room for individual creativity outside of the core mission.” Wartime conditions can come even to well-established, strong companies, but for startups and their leaders, it’s Wartime 24/7.
However, Horowitz’s advice for the Wartime phase can be quite extreme. Clearly, leaders need to act decisively, and especially with start-ups, they often need to decide quickly and sometimes unilaterally, especially if there has not been enough opportunity to gather a team of seasoned professionals, as I will discuss in the next chapter. But Horowitz implies that you need to stay in Wartime mode until you do have a strong competitive edge. That gives permission, and even encourages leaders to behave in a controlling and autocratic way, exercising top-down leadership rather than seeking buy-in and consensus.
This is problematic in the long run. As you begin to bring in more senior people, who expect and deserve to have a level of autonomy and a voice in decision making, if you stay in Wartime mode too long and are too controlling, you will fail to leverage the synergy of your team. You won’t be able to benefit from hearing voices and opinions that prevent you from falling into sunflower bias or confirmation bias. After all, the benefit of involving a group in decision making is to gather diverse and creative perspectives on how to deal with problems and questions.
In situations that require fast, decisive action, it may occasionally be necessary for a leader to either make a decision without input or to seek input but not have the time to reach consensus when it comes to choosing a course of action. This would be a case of, “Thank you very much for your input, I’ll let you know what I decide.Be careful not to operate in Wartime mode as a default, but only when it is truly necessary. Be adaptable. Adjust the amount of participation you allow and input you ask for, based upon the maturity and expertise of the team around you.
share this
Related Articles
Related Articles

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.

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.

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.


