When the Role Outgrows the Person
One of the hardest founder conversations usually contains some version of this sentence:
“But they’ve been here since the beginning.”
Which is rarely just about performance.
It’s about loyalty, history, gratitude, and the painful reality that the role may have changed faster than the person in it.
When the role outgrows the person
There’s a framework from Gino Wickman’s "Traction" that I come back to often.
GWC.
Gets it.
Wants it.
Has the capacity to do it.
It’s simple, which is probably why it’s useful. For someone to be successful in a role, all three things need to be true.
They need to get it. Not just intellectually, but intuitively. They understand what the role requires and what good looks like.
They need to want it. Not want the title, or the status, or the proximity to leadership. They need to want the actual work.
And they need to have the capacity to do it. The skill, judgment, bandwidth, emotional maturity, and ability to handle the complexity the role requires.
That last one is where founder-led companies often get stuck. Because in the early days, your first employees usually do get it. That’s why they were there in the first place.
They know the product.
They believe in the mission.
They understand the customer.
They remember what it took to get the company here.
They have lived close enough to the founder to absorb how the business works. But as a company grows, the roles grow too.
A job that once required grit, loyalty, and deep company knowledge may eventually require a different level of leadership, structure, decision-making, and sophistication.
The person may still get it.
They may deeply want it.
They may have earned the opportunity to try.
And still, they may not have the capacity for what the role now requires. Or at least not on the timeline the business needs.
That is one of the harder realities of growth.
These are not always people who failed the company. Often, they are people who helped build it.
They made sacrifices. They stayed late. They wore too many hats. They cared before there was anything impressive to care about.
So when the business changes, it can feel unfair to question whether they are still the right fit for the seat they are in.
But growing up with a company can distort how someone understands their own readiness. I've experienced this myself.
They see the years they put in, the problems they solved, and the title just above them. So naturally, they think, “I can do that.”
But often, they have never seen what that same role looks like inside a larger, more sophisticated organization.
They are evaluating the role based on the company they grew up in. Not the company the business is becoming.
And this is where founders often delay the conversation.
They tell themselves they are being loyal.
They tell themselves they are protecting the person.
They tell themselves more time will solve it.
Sometimes it does.
But often, what gets created instead is months, or even years, of pain for both the employee and the organization.
The employee feels confused because the expectations keep changing. The team feels the drag because the seat is not carrying what the business now requires. And the founder feels stuck because the decision is no longer just about performance.
Loyalty is one of the most beautiful parts of founder-led companies.
It is also one of the places where founders can do the most damage when they confuse loyalty with avoidance.
The kindest thing is naming the change clearly enough, and early enough, that everyone has a fair chance to respond to reality. Not pretending the role has not changed.
Sometimes that means helping someone grow into the next version of the role or moving them into a seat where they can actually thrive.
And sometimes it means admitting that the company has outgrown what they are able to give.
None of those conversations are easy.
But they are much easier before the gap gets too wide to close.
Continue Reading