I’m generally weary of celebrity founders and CEOs. I also don’t believe it’s appropriate to silence people, especially as a cover up for a bigger issue, which seems to be the case here. I can understand founders wanting to shift policies or change culture. But you should expect this type of blowback when so many people bought into your original mission.

Does the CEO have “the right” to make these changes? Yes.

But culture isn’t about one person, or one policy. It’s about what you do and say every day. And by the looks of it the founders were anxious to make their dirty laundry go away and found a jet stream to ride (see: Coinbase.)

I posted this on Telepath:

COVID had effectively reduced OpEx by 50%. Through remote hiring, outsourcing, SG&A reduction, and dramatic reductions in both facilities and amenities (discretionary) spending.

The shift to digital sped up. Dramatically. So across the board we’re seeing lots of startups doing really well.

The availability of cash is almost unprecedented. Lots of money chasing returns.

Collectively, this is a giving founders the power and window to impact transformational change within their organizations. If your startup is 5+ years old, the early believers have already been burned and many have left. But some stay. And then more new people and higher turnover. Creating a difficult mix of old school and new school. I know Patreon. They have this.

I think lots of founders secretly want out of the woke game. And I am saddened by that, as it cheapens the effort. But I am reluctant to judge them. They are tired. They’ve put 10+ years into something and haven’t had the exit they dreamed of. They’ve moved from creator to manager. And they don’t love it. And this window gives them the opportunity to “clean house”. Basecamp is doing this with their severances, btw.

While I personally disagree with many of these people and their intentions, some of the founders are seeing this as a shift that can make it easier to manage their companies into the future.