Founders Syndrome Issues - Essay Example

Running Head: Founder’s Syndrome Founder’s Syndrome Inserts His/her Founder’s Syndrome If I were to put myself in Lucy’s shoes, as nature suggests, I definitely would have resisted the changes that the board was suggesting. EGO was my organization, I birthed it and it is me who nurtured it to futility all through my life. No human being would ever want to lose his/her belonging that he/she is so devoted to – that is how human nature works. Lucy is no different a case. She cannot allow being kicked out of her founder’s seat just to be taken by another amateur who has nothing to do with the birth of the organization or even has lived with the organization for as long as Lucy did. Quite literally the organization does belong to Lucy and she does have a right over its major decisions. That was an honest view. But things do not really function like that. In a growing and flourishing organization, no single person can be the sole owner or the decision maker of the organization’s activities. An organization is a group of persons, working towards a common objective (Norbert). This very definition outlaws a sole proprietor of an organization, rather puts the duty of ownership on the shoulders of a group of people. Quite similarly, though Lucy’s feelings can be justified using her emotional attachment to her baby organization, one need to look at the picture from several angles. It is the reputation of the organization that we need to deal with at large and kicking out a single person for the good of it is worth the fruit. I am Lucy for now. I am hurt and shattered since my very board wants me out of the organization for a meager incident at a dinner party. Is it justified that I just be kicked out for a small incident in sixteen years of my devotion to the organization, forgetting how I had let the organization grow? I have my points. At the Board’s meeting I will first defend myself, since the incident that caused a stir throughout the organization does not really have to do anything with me directly. Firstly, why should I be blamed and replaced for another’s actions? Though I do understand I need to take a part of the responsibility, which I do but is it really justified that I be shot for that? That is the first question that I will put forward to the board. Once tried defending, I will put forward other alternatives for the organization to go for that will not make me sound too self centered. Probably I will suggest them to overlook the policies of the organization and see what changes can be brought in there that will give the organization a new air – reshuffling is not the only option. The most prominent question arises; will firing me really make a difference? If it is for the good of my baby organization, I will give up on my own. If I do not, probably I am suffering from founder’s syndrome – a situation where a single individual or group bring an organization through tough times (Gottlieb, 2003) 2. As a Board’s member I can account for Lucy’s resistance as her founder’s syndrome. This is very common in people who are attached with an organization for long and want to have a say in the organization’s business. To make Lucy understand the grave situation time is posing, I’ll put forward a number of arguments to make her realize that her replacement will eventually bring good fortune to the nonprofit and will also be a source of pride for Lucy herself. One of the most famous metaphors in this case is; ‘once you have birthed it, it is no longer your baby’ (Gottlieb, 2003). Lucy will need to be convinced that similar to a mother who puts her life into her children to nurture and grow them, an organization also needs to be nurtured and grown with full devotion. What makes things different is the fact that akin to a child who is a person in his or her own right way regardless of the nurturing he or she receives, an organization is also an entity in its own right and we do not own it. It is rather owned by everyone under its roof and anybody who causes damage to the environment of the organization should be replaced. After all it is the organization at stake, and everybody attached to this organization. One of the best tactics to convince Lucy is to make the whole idea sound as emotional as it can be – since we know that Lucy has a great emotional attachment to her baby organization. Some of the arguments that she could be convinced with can be like that bringing a child into the world also brings the responsibility of independent growth for the child. A child cannot rely on his/her parents for life and need to be tamed to live and do things independently – incase his/her parents do not get to live long. Quite similarly, an organization needs to be tamed to continue prospering even if its founder is no more there to look after it. Though founders do create a gap after their departure, such gaps can be filled with timely replacements so that changing founders do not bring in trouble for the organization (Sims & Quatro, 2005). It is better to let the organization grow than thinking that the real founder – the one who birthed it – has the sole right to it and only he or she can lead the company to growth. This idea is a mere illusion. Lucy can also be convinced with the idea that her vision does not necessarily reflect the organization or the community’s vision. With changing times and circumstances, visions are updated too and Lucy’s vision may lack some positivity. Lucy can be let know that it was time for her to move on since the majority of the board felt that her replacement was now necessary. This does not have to be blunt but Lucy’s devotion should be acknowledged and be told that all of it was for the betterment of her baby – the organization. 3. There is no firm guarantee that such a situation could have been avoided for certain but yes the chances of it could have been minimized with appropriate precautionary measures. Founder’s syndrome is common and unfortunately cannot be fished out like a cancer growth from the body. Simply, that is how human nature is and there is hard evidence of anybody giving up his or her organization into the hands of others since it really belongs to them - the real creators. Nonetheless such situations can be controlled since they result in several problems, such as loss of staff motivation (Shortall, 2007). Personal growth is the key solution to the many problems. It is for the founder to realize that he or she is not there to live forever and should work from day one with the idea that there has to be a formal end to this job. Growing up on this idea the founder should have a passion for the organization and should not want to see it fall apart in his/her absence. This will enable the founder to get in good terms with the staff and create a smooth flow in the functioning of the company. This will lessen the chances of founder’s syndrome since the founder will never really want to stick forever to his/her organization. Carter McNamara, founder of nonprofit Manager’s Library, suggests a yearly risk management exercise. He suggests that every year a mock exam should be carried out, assuming that the founder has suddenly left (McNamara, 2011). This exercise is of key importance since it indirectly suggests that the founder is a position too that the founder will have to leave and other employees have a chance to that seat. This if applied in the organization could have saved the bad repute brought to EGO and Lucy could have grown with the reality that she eventually has to leave. Lucy could also have strengthened her ties with the staff of the organization and that could have helped her in not coming down to this bad stage. Friendly attitude towards the staff and an overall good environment would have strengthened her ties with the organization and could have possibly saved her from being fired. The more devoted the staff found her the higher were her chances of not being fired. Unfortunately, this too missed on Lucy’s part and ended in serious trouble for her. One of the key responsibilities of the founder is to be fully aware of the organization’s happenings. This enables in timely action and the outlawing of unwanted factors. For Lucy, she should have made sure she was fully aware of what was happening in EGO. If she was aware of her colleagues condition or life, she might have worked towards helping her out and the happening of such incident could have been minimized. References Norbert Wiener, N. (n.d.). Organizations & Geoghraphy. UW Faculty Web Server. Retrieved from http://faculty.washington.edu/krumme/readings/organizations.html Gottlieb , H. (2003). Founder’s Syndrome? Who Me? help4nonprofits. Shortall, J. (2007, January). Strategies for Managers Working within Founder’s Syndrome Organizations. Social Enterprise Associates - Financial Performance, Social Impact, Environmental Sustainability. McNamara, C. (2011, December). Founders Syndrome: How Corporations Suffer -- and Can Recover. Free Management Library (SM). Sims, R. R., & Quatro, S. A. (2005). Leadership: Succeeding in the private, public, and not-for-profit sectors. Armonk, N.Y: M.E. Sharpe. Read More