Founder's syndrome, sometimes called Founderitis, is a label normally used to refer to a pattern of behavior on the part of the founder(s) of an organization that, over time, becomes maladaptive to the successful accomplishment of the organizational mission. The term is anecdotal/unofficial and does not actually refer to a medical syndrome

Syndrome

In medicine and psychology, a syndrome is the association of several clinically recognizable features, signs , symptoms , phenomena or characteristics that often occur together, so that the presence of one or more features alerts the physician to the possible presence of the others...

. It is particularly common where there has only been one person leading the organization or the board of directors

Board of directors

A board of directors is a body of elected or appointed members who jointly oversee the activities of a company or organization. Other names include board of governors, board of managers, board of regents, board of trustees, and board of visitors...

 since its inception and commonly occurs in both non-profit

Non-profit organization

Nonprofit organization is neither a legal nor technical definition but generally refers to an organization that uses surplus revenues to achieve its goals, rather than distributing them as profit or dividends...

 and for-profit.

An organization faces founder's syndrome as the scope of activities widen and number of stakeholders increase. Without an effective and inclusive decision making structure and process there is potential for conflict between newcomers, seeking effective involvement with organizational development and the founder(s) who seek to dominate the decision making process. This can be very disruptive, both to the organization and to the individuals concerned and should be carefully and clearly diagnosed and addressed quickly and decisively.

There are a number of negative effects that may occur when an original founder CEO seeks to maintain disproportionate power and influence beyond the initial growth phase of an organization.

• Exclusion of newcomers: First, a founder's passion and charisma, initially essential to the successful establishment of an organization, becomes a limiting rather than a creative and productive force. As an organization matures, professionally-trained and talented people are normally engaged and the board is expanded. The founder's domination of the decision making process may frustrate effective and inclusive group decision making.

• Identity of the organization: The organization may, over time, be overly identified with the person or personality of the founder and may experience diminished public trust. Typically, there is little organizational infrastructure in place. There is no succession plan, and it would not be unusual to hear the words, “That’s not how we’ve always done it.”

• Decision making: The founder is at the center of all decision-making. Decisions are frequently made quickly, with little input from others. Often, decisions are made in crisis mode, with little forward planning to prevent problems from reoccurring. As a whole, the organization becomes reactive, rather than proactive. Staff meetings are held generally to report crises, rally the troops, and get status reports on assignments. There is very little concept here of team strategy development and shared executive agreement on objectives. Limited or a complete lack of professional development for existing and budding leaders reenforces and solidifies the balance of power.

• Nepotism/cronyism: In its early development, the board is often selected by the founder and thus is often composed of friends and colleagues of the founder. The board’s role may be relegated to "support" for the founder, rather than to lead the organization. They are often a rubber stamp board, having little understanding of the work the organization does. Their commitment isn’t to the mission, but to the founder. They are unable to answer basic questions without checking first – such as the size of the budget, the major funding sources, the extent of the programs. This may limit the independent functioning of the board and deprive the organization of more diverse and representative views. Staff may also have been chosen due to their personal loyalty to the founder rather than skills, organizational fit, or experience. Founders tend to surround themselves with cheerleaders, rather than people with valuable insights and ideas.

Coping with Founder's syndrome requires discussion of the problem, a plan of action, and interventions by the founder, the board and or by others involved in the organization. The objective of the plan should be to allow the organization to make a successful transition to a mature organizational model without damage to either the organization itself or to the individuals concerned.