In the fast-paced world of tech startups, “founder mode” has become synonymous with relentless drive and unwavering focus on growth. But what toll does this mentality take on employees? We sat down with John Fly, a technology executive with 30 years of industry experience, to explore the human cost of the “growth at all costs” mindset. With roles spanning CTO, VP of Engineering, and Director of Product Architecture and pursuing his Doctorate in Strategic Leadership, Fly brings a unique perspective on sustainable leadership and ethical growth.

Interviewer: Based on your experience, what are the most common ways you’ve seen “founder mode” behavior negatively impact employees, even when the company is achieving its growth objectives?

JFly: I’ve worked in technology for over 30 years across enterprises of all sizes. While company size doesn’t perfectly predict CEO behavior, I’ve noticed that younger companies—especially those with younger CEOs who embrace the term “founder mode”—often create some of the most unhealthy environments.

These leaders typically view growth solely through the lens of revenue, market share, or customer acquisition. While any successful CEO needs above-average confidence and ego, those who celebrate “founder mode” are often the most focused on personal success—and ironically, some of the weakest actual leaders I’ve encountered.

What’s particularly troubling is when they knowingly hire people with the intention of using them up, burning them out, and replacing them—treating employees as disposable resources in their pursuit of growth. It’s fundamentally toxic to play with people’s wellbeing and their families’ stability this way.

Interviewer: You’ve drawn a distinction between leaders who “inspire and motivate” versus those who “grind people up.” Can you describe what you consider to be the key differences between healthy high-growth leadership and toxic “founder mode” behavior?

JFly: Let me share a striking example from a company meeting I attended. The newly hired Chief People Officer was discussing burnout prevention and the importance of work-life balance. Mid-presentation, the Chief Revenue Officer interrupted to rebuke her statements, declaring they needed people who could “lean in hard, hustle and grind” to hit sales targets.

This stark contrast perfectly illustrates the internal friction that occurs when leadership isn’t aligned on how to treat team members. While change management is challenging, frameworks like Kotter’s 8-step model show it’s possible to drive transformation honestly and transparently, without being ruthless.

Interviewer: How can companies maintain aggressive growth goals while still protecting employee wellbeing? Is there a middle ground?

JFly: “Founder mode” can lead to success, but often through constantly churning through subordinates. This typically manifests in two ways:

First, there’s the deceptive approach: publicly claiming to be a great workplace where “we’re all family” and promising shared success, while knowing full well that unless employees have significant equity, they won’t meaningfully participate in the company’s success. They’ll likely burn out and be replaced by the next person willing to sacrifice their life for someone else’s dream.

The second approach is more transparent: being upfront about expectations for extreme dedication and intense focus. This can work if positioned honestly—perhaps as an opportunity for rapid career growth and experience. However, even when equity is offered, vesting schedules and purchase requirements often advantage founders over employees.

Real leaders understand how to balance pushing for growth with necessary recovery periods, much like elite athletes. They create sustainable high-performance environments that enable consistent excellence without burning people out.

Interviewer: What role does compensation structure play in either enabling toxic founder mode behavior or promoting healthier high-performance cultures?

JFly: If a CEO exhibits negative founder mode traits while most employees aren’t enrolled in profit-sharing or equity programs, that’s a red flag. They’re essentially saying “we’re all going to the moon” while they’re the only one on the rocket—everyone else is just fuel to be burned.

Profit-sharing tends to appear in more established organizations or those without venture capital backing. A well-documented profit-sharing program can signal that the company is stable and that internal motivation efforts are genuine rather than manipulative.

Ultimately, participants need to evaluate whether both parties are benefiting from the relationship. It’s reasonable to ask, “If the company succeeds, will I actually share in that success?” There are many opportunities for win-win scenarios in business—success shouldn’t require sacrificing others.

Interviewer: For someone currently working in or considering joining a high-growth startup, what specific warning signs or “red flags” would you advise them to look for that might indicate toxic founder mode behavior? Conversely, what positive indicators suggest a healthy high-performance culture?

JFly: Watch for excessive use of phrases like “founder mode,” “hustle,” “grind,” or similar terms. Investigate employee tenure, turnover rates, and the nature of departures. High involuntary turnover, especially cited as “culture fit” issues, can signal an environment that burns through people who won’t sacrifice everything for the company’s success.

During interviews, ask about typical tenure, culture, and expectations. Research public reviews on platforms like Glassdoor, Blind, or Reddit if available.

Positive indicators include:

• Transparent sharing of compensation packages and retention data
• Clear expectations and growth opportunities
• Well-defined success metrics beyond “more money, more customers.”
• A sound mission, vision, and strategic plan
• Consistent messaging across all interviewer interactions
• Corroboration from public information and employee feedback

If these elements align and you feel the value equation balances for both parties, that’s a green flag.

The key is remembering that while high-performance environments inherently require stretching and growth, sustainable success never demands sacrificing human well-being. True leadership creates environments where the company and its people can thrive together.

---

John Fly is a veteran technology executive with over three decades of experience in building and leading high-performing technical teams. He has served in C-suite and senior leadership positions across multiple organizations, focusing on developing technical leaders and driving transformative initiatives. Currently pursuing his Doctorate in Strategic Leadership from Liberty University, Fly combines practical experience with academic rigor to advocate for ethical and sustainable leadership practices in the technology sector.