Source: Facebook

BEING IN CHARGE MEANS DIFFERENT THINGS. I PLAY MERLIN NOT ARTHUR

1) I am an INTP. I actively seek out INTJ’s to ‘run things’. So I suspect that the possibility of being ‘in charge’ tactically (INTJ) or strategically (INTP) is not something the ordinary folk reading the OP intuit. My ability to absorb and make use of information is better suited to exploiting strategic opportunities(strategy) than seeking operational efficiencies (tactics). This is common for sales-oriented executives.

2) When I run companies I hire strong operations people to manage daily operations (details). I focus on processes, developing executive talent, expanding the business, doing acquisitions, winning customers, deals, and acquiring (usually stealing) talent. I give almost all control to these people and in particular I don’t ever sign checks, and only sign contracts as a secondary. I prefer a board meeting where every group reports. I use my board and management team. I expect them to falsify my ideas. If I can’t convince them, I don’t do it. If I can, and we get unanimity I do it. That’s sort of a knights of the round-table thing.

3) I find that smart diligent people can do operations, and that there are many of them. I find daily operations (finance(banks, investors), accounting(ar/ap,payroll), managerial accounting (measurements), contracts, both tedious, boring, and a bad use of my time. I am better at doing what others cannot do nearly as well. That is especially true of training a management team from supernerds, and continuous strategic expansion of the business.

4) To some degree I run a business as if I am a consultant running continuous strategy sessions. Because, running strategy sessions (business analysis, strategy, operations, and tactics). I evolved a habit of working hard for three months to drive the business strategically involving a lot of people in strategy sessions, and then working lightly and tactically for three months letting the management team ‘take charge’ (learn), then repeating the cycle. I meet with a BIG management team every week, and I consider it a class in operating businesses. I run it like a grad session.

5) While this model works best for me, there are problems with this method that I have observed repeatedly. (a) the staff grows overconfident as daily management, since they do not realize what I am doing to and with them and this ends up with power struggles. (b) companies seem to always survive my departure, but stagnate and lose their ‘magic’.

6) So far my only ‘failures’ have been when I am unable to find that operations person, or when the person I do find is overconfident and has bad intuitions. (three times). There is a reason I’ve partnered with the same people over multiple companies. We know our roles. Curt (sales, delivery, talent/ ceo), Jim(operations / president-COO) and steven (customer service/evp).

7) the problem with being ‘visionary’ to some degree, is that it is almost impossible for people to grok you’re plans, and they will circle to outmaneuver some plans if they understand them. SO this is why I have a reputation somewhere between merlin and the devil.

I think the reason people like working for me is the “run a company like a grad session” model, with a LOT of participants, while holding decisions to the partners (owners).

I think the reasons people don’t like working for me are numerous.