Ask HN: Difference of implication between co-founders
We agree on almost everything (vision, equity, responsibilities)
However, there is one issue where we cannot come to an agreement: how to manage a difference of implication between the co-founders. I have no girlfriend/family and very little responsibilities, so I can and expect to put all of my time into this venture (minus sleep, eating and exercice). However, one of the founders has a family and the responsibilities that come with it, so the effort he can put in is more limited. The french 35h/week is ok for him, he can maybe do more sometimes, but with no guarantee.
My question: how can I manage the likely difference of implication, when it comes to equity/compensation and the implicit contract we have between each other.
I see a few possibilities:
- Tolerate it: each co-founder has equal equity and is expected to work 35h/week. More effort is not rewarded. I suspect this will be highly demotivating for high performers.
- Ban it: set a minimum of 50 or 60h/week, and refuse anyone who cannot pull it off. I am good friends with all my co-founders, so I don't like the idea of them not joining because they have a family. Besides, most of us will start a family at some point.
- Measure and scale: find some way of measuring implication and reward everyone including co-founders proportional to it. This introduces the problem having to measure, estimate or self-report the implication of each one.
Thoughts?
1 comment
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 15.5 ms ] threadAlso working more than 8 hours a day will not make you more productive, especially over a longer period of time.
Also, you'll never get a family if you're working every free hour of the day.
Having good chemistry between founders is very important, more important than who's putting in a few more hours.
My advice: base everything on a normal work week, everything over that is voluntary. Family is the thing you work for, so that's always more important.