One of the best things about working at startups is that no matter how hard you try, there will always be at least one person that is smarter than you.

Accept it.

One of the best things about working in an early stage company is that you build relationships that are life long.

Enjoy it.

One of the best things about creating something new, something of value, is the friction that smart people who respect one another allow.

Seek it.

Recently, one of the board members at Lijit, Paul Berberian, wrote a post entitled Partner Dynamics and Nuclear Weapons. In the post, he uses the analogy of how cofounders/partners should each have the ability to make ONE decision that the other cofounders/partners abide by without question. The reasoning, as I read it, was that above all, the trust and respect that the cofounders/partners had for each other was sacrosact.

“I went home that night and thought about how I misread his willingness to go along with my decision – I was losing his trust and confidence.”

As I finished reading Paul’s post, I had two reactions. One was self-preservation (“Man, at Lijit, I am not a cofounder/partner, shit, I dont get one of those!”) and one was complete understanding and respect. (Companies come and go. People that you trust and have confidence in dont.).

The next day, I read Todd Vernon‘s reaction to his former partner’s post. It was a great example of Todd’s thought process:

You inevitably end up in a few knock-down-drag-out fights over the years in about any startup scenario. I think this is just a natural occurrence and depending on the passion and emotion of the people involved it can be hard to distinguish this normal disagreement from one that is really a serious event.

Friction is inevitable. There have been many disagreements in my startup life. Honestly, when things are running too smoothly, I get worried. I start looking for the other shoe. I start questioning my effort.

Todd goes on to write:

You know turning the key will suddenly take the discussion potentially into an uncontrollable place (for good or bad), therefore you don’t turn the key unless the threat equals the potential consequences.

My partner, Matt Hessler, at Current Wisdom pulled his warhead out about 2 years into the endeavor. I was making bad decisions personally, and they were affecting the company as a whole. In this case, he blew himself up. He left the company (or as I assume he thought, the shell of what could have been, and the wasteland that was what my life had become).

Unlike real nuclear war, when the warhead is pulled out in a company, among friends/partners/cofounders, it is always done in deference to the company and the people. When Todd pulled out his warhead with Paul, it made 1) Paul re-evaluate his stance based on his relationship with Todd; and 2) allowed Todd to have a clearer head and come to what appears was the proper decision collectively. When Matt pulled the trigger on his, it was the beginning of my re-evaluation of the choices I was making. (It wasnt the end of them, that took another couple of years — I am a slow learner).

While Raindance (the company I assume Paul is writing about), continued on to a successful exit; Current Wisdom was never the same. We continued on, we did okay. We even had a successful exit. But the company no longer existed.

Using the warhead is a signal that the partnership has broken down – the ultimate wake-up call that something is wrong. It is designed as a measure of last resort – everyone fears being in a company post detonation. If a warhead is detonated, it will be the beginning of the end.

If you are a new startup, heed the words that Paul wrote. When the trust and respect breaks down among the partners/cofounders, the company is dead.

Have your disputes. Let them be screaming matches full of bad words. Call each other bastards. Just dont ever stop trusting or respecting each other.

It is at that moment, you have lost.

Joshua: Greetings, Professor Falken.
Stephen Falken: Hello, Joshua.
Joshua: A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess? — Wargames (1983)

Popularity: unranked [?]