

The Dark Side of Startups: 5 Corrosive Co-Founder Conflicts - epi0Bauqu
http://onstartups.com/home/tabid/3339/bid/2148/The-Dark-Side-of-Startups-5-Corrosive-Co-Founder-Conflicts.aspx

======
donna
I had the pit-bull conflict, where 1 of the the 5 would instigate a dog fight
by building doubt about two of original founders. He would call up the other
two guys only to talk about how the original founders didn't do it right. The
other two guys became so weak and confused, GAWD, it was a nightmare
relationship. The project died, the money drained, what a great lesson in
regards to making sure the team works well together, has the same intention re
the project, and feels fairly rewarded.

~~~
staunch
_"... the more founders you have, the worse disagreements you'll have. When
there are just two or three founders, you know you have to resolve disputes
immediately or perish. If there are seven or eight, disagreements can linger
and harden into factions."_ \-- How to Start a Startup

------
epi0Bauqu
IMO, equal shares and consensus decision making go a long way in avoidance of
a whole host of potentially fatal startup conflicts. And having a policy to
openly discuss everything, which goes hand in hand with consensus decision
making, creates a healthy forum to resolve conflicts before they blow up into
unresolvable or annoying-to-resolve situations.

~~~
dshah
I agree with the transparency part, but I don't think the the "equal shares"
concept is necessarily sound. It assumes that all founders are contributing
equally which is not always the case.

What you are looking to do is make things equitable -- not equal.

~~~
staunch
Equal is optimal though. It's a matter of debate how much each is contributing
but there's no debating whether 50% is half or not.

