Build a Team That Multiplies

During forming, the founder is defining the team required for the company’s current stage.

The key questions are:

The mistake is beginning with titles or copying the structure of a larger company.

A startup should design roles around the work and outcomes that matter now.

For example, the company may not need a broad Head of Marketing. It may need someone specifically accountable for generating qualified demand from one defined customer segment.

Storming is where reality tests the original team design.

Differences and tensions become visible:

Storming should not automatically be treated as interpersonal dysfunction.

It may be evidence that the roles, people or operating model need to change.

The founder should ask:

Avoiding these questions allows confusion and resentment to grow.

Norming occurs when the company turns lessons from the storming stage into a clearer operating model.

The team establishes:

The practical test is whether every important outcome has one clear owner.

Team members should understand:

Norming reduces dependence on the founder because the team no longer needs constant interpretation of responsibilities.

A performing team has the roles, capabilities and behaviours required to deliver together.

People:

Performance does not mean that the original roles remain fixed forever.

As the business evolves, the founder must continue asking:

A person who was an excellent fit at one stage may need coaching, additional support, a redesigned role or a different position as the company grows.

Trust allows people to be honest about:

At Tribal DDB during the global financial crisis, radical transparency helped create this foundation. The situation was frightening, but acknowledging reality made it possible for the team to face the challenge together.

Trust does not mean avoiding standards or difficult decisions.

It means people do not need to hide the truth to protect themselves.

Trust makes honest disagreement possible.

People can challenge:

The purpose is not to win an argument.

It is to reach a stronger decision.

Teams that avoid conflict may appear harmonious while important doubts, risks and resentment move into private conversations.

After the team has debated the issue, it must make a clear decision.

Commitment requires clarity about:

People do not need to receive their preferred outcome.

They need the opportunity to contribute and confidence that the decision is clear.

Commitment creates the basis for accountability.

The team can now address:

Accountability should not be the founder’s responsibility alone.

High-performing teams hold one another to the standards and commitments they have agreed.

The final test is whether people prioritise the team’s shared outcomes above:

A high-performing team understands that individual success matters most when it contributes to the company’s shared result.

Ask:

Ask:

A team may have strong trust but unclear roles.

It may have clear roles but avoid conflict.

It may contain talented people who are no longer matched to what their roles require.

The leadership task is to identify the weakest point and address it directly.

Trust begins when people believe that reality can be discussed openly.

That includes:

The Tribal DDB experience taught me that people can handle difficult information better than leaders often assume.

What damages trust is not always the bad news itself. It is the feeling that important information is being hidden or softened until it is too late.

Transparency does not mean sharing every private detail or speaking without judgement. It means giving people the information they genuinely need to understand the situation and contribute responsibly.

A leader can say:

That is more useful than false certainty.

As startups grow, responsibilities often develop informally.

Someone begins helping with sales. Another person takes ownership of operations. A founder continues making product decisions because they have always done so.

Over time, several people may believe they own the same outcome—or nobody does.

Role clarity should answer:

A job title is not enough.

A strong role definition focuses on responsibility rather than a long list of tasks.

For example:

That is clearer than:

People can work hard while moving in different directions.

Sales may prioritise short-term revenue. Product may prioritise platform quality. Marketing may prioritise reach. Operations may prioritise efficiency.

Each objective may be sensible in isolation while creating conflict across the company.

Alignment means agreeing on the small number of outcomes that matter most now.

A useful alignment rhythm clarifies:

The team should be able to answer:

Founders often delegate work without delegating decisions.

A team member may be responsible for an outcome but still need approval for every important choice. This creates the appearance of ownership without the authority required to deliver.

Decision clarity should distinguish between:

Not every decision needs a committee.

Accountability often becomes emotional because it is introduced only after something has gone wrong.

A healthier approach makes commitments visible from the beginning.

Every meaningful commitment should clarify:

When a commitment is missed, the first goal is to understand why.

Possible causes include:

Accountability should identify the real issue rather than immediately assigning blame.

But empathy must not become avoidance.

Feedback should help people improve the work and their judgement.

It should not be limited to annual performance reviews or moments of frustration.

Useful feedback is:

A simple feedback structure is:

For example:

This is more useful than:

Feedback should also move upwards.

Founders need people who can say:

The final stage is not simply building a team that follows the founder well.

It is developing people who can create clarity, make decisions and improve the capability of others.

A multiplying leader:

Doing the work personally may be faster today.

Teaching someone else to own it creates more capacity tomorrow.

The founder should regularly ask:

The pattern usually comes from positive intentions:

And it often is faster—today.

But repeatedly solving the problem personally makes the company slower tomorrow.

Every rescue should raise a second question:

The goal is not for the founder to stop helping.

The goal is to stop being the only person capable of helping.

A multiplying leader responds differently.

Instead of immediately taking over, they ask:

The founder may still intervene during a genuine crisis.

But intervention should be followed by learning:

The objective is to leave the company more capable after every problem.

Early-stage companies often copy job titles and structures from much larger organisations.

A title may sound appropriate while concealing a poorly designed role.

Start with the work.

Ask:

Startups change quickly.

A role that was appropriate at ten people may look very different at thirty or one hundred. The person who succeeded while improvising may struggle when the company requires planning, delegation and repeatable systems.

This does not automatically mean the person has failed.

It may mean:

Ask:

Shared responsibility often sounds collaborative.

In practice, it can mean that nobody feels fully accountable.

For every important outcome, define:

Some teams appear calm because nobody challenges one another.

Meetings remain polite. Decisions receive little resistance. Difficult topics are postponed or discussed privately afterwards.

This is not necessarily alignment.

It may be artificial harmony.

Leaders can encourage healthy conflict by asking:

A team may have a thoughtful discussion and still leave with different interpretations of the decision.

At the end of an important discussion, confirm:

Founders often delay difficult conversations because they want to preserve trust or morale.

But unaddressed performance issues usually damage both.

Begin by clarifying whether the issue is:

Accountability should be direct and fair.

It should include support, clear improvement expectations and an honest timeframe.

Teams can become extremely busy without producing the outcomes the company needs.

Each role should have a small number of clear outcomes.

Activities matter only when they contribute to the result.

Feedback loses value when it arrives too late.

A concern that could have been corrected through one early conversation may become months of frustration, lost trust and formal performance management.

Do not store feedback for an annual review.

Annual reviews should summarise and develop—not surprise.

The team structure should reflect the company you are building now—not the company you hope to become several years from now.

Begin by clarifying:

For each role, clarify:

Evaluate each person against the role as it exists now.

Consider:

Ask:

Possible actions include:

Share enough context for people to exercise judgement.

This may include:

The Tribal DDB town halls worked because transparency was paired with a plan.

The message was not:

It was:

Every important outcome should have one clear owner.

For each priority, define:

Use a delegation progression:

When roles, priorities or decisions change, disagreement is normal.

Invite people to challenge:

Then close the discussion clearly.

Confirm:

Choose the measures that show whether the team is producing the intended result.

Review outcomes through a regular rhythm.

When a problem reaches the founder, pause before taking it over.

Ask:

When intervention is necessary, improve the system afterwards.