To Founder Mode or Not to Founder Mode?

As somebody who is no longer based in Silicon Valley, I make an effort to read the tech Twitter. If you are not doing the same, the hottest topic the last few days has been Paul Graham's essay Founder Mode. The reason I want to talk about it is that the most frequent question I get from managers I work with is "what does it take to be a great manager?" I think this essay is very relevant, even though there are several points to disagree with there.

The point of the essay, which admittedly is not very detailed, is there are two modes of running an org: a "Founder Mode" and a "Manager Mode". The difference is stark. The traditional wisdom is that a great leader is somebody who hires a great team, sets a vision, and then gives the team space to execute. They delegate. More than anything, this traditional leader avoids micromanagement. This is the "Manager Mode", according to PG.

On the contrary, the "Fonder Mode" is about getting into details. It's about making decisions by yourself. It's about not being afraid to sweat the small stuff. This is supposedly how founder-lead companies are run, and why they generally outperform companies that are not run by founders. PG clearly advocates the Founder Mode.

Now, the best part of reading PG is that he always make you think about where you agree with him and where you do not. Here are my thoughts:

I think it is true that great founders are into details to a surprising degree. The few times I've been to Mark Zuckerberg reviews I've been amazed how much he cares about some seemingly minor things, such as design of a screen, the behavior of a feature, a particular metric, a small policy detail, and so on.

But one place I disagree with PG is that it's not just founders who can exhibit this behavior. Several Meta leaders I've observed closely, including top WhatsApp leaders, equally go into details to a great degree. The team being questioned this way may feel a bit awkward about it, but there is no denying that this is impressive and very effective.

Finally, a couple of things what the Founder Mode is not. First, being a great leader does not mean that you get into every detail. Great leaders still delegate very often. But they have an uncanny sense of where to get into details. They know where to delegate and where to drill down. This is very important - otherwise you can't scale at all.

Second, being in a Founder Mode does not mean being an asshole, whatever people think of Steve Jobs and his leadership style. I've never seen great leaders act with disrespect, even when they ask tough questions and get into gory details. This is also important to remember.

Now, you may say, I'm not a founder, how does this all apply to me? My point is that great engineering managers go beyond just managing their team. They develop deep domain expertise. They have a point of view on many questions. They get into details where it's important. They act more like founders do rather than being just typical people managers.

I suggest you read PG's essay, and ask yourself how you can move just a bit closer towards Founder Mode. It may be uncomfortable, it definitely takes an extra effort, but I think it'll be worth it. Just remember to think for yourself how this applies to your particular situation.