Start-Ups: Dangers of "Bifurcated Vision"

In case you are wondering where the word. "bifurcated" came from. I checked the good folks at www.thefreedictionary.com and it means, "to divide into two branches."

So just what am I going on about? Well, in the context of a technology start-up, it usually means that the company's founders do not share a common vision. In a society where the individual is celebrated, what's so bad about that? Unfortunately for technology start-ups operating in fast-moving industries and competing against well- or better funded start-ups, the bifurcated vision can be a fatal diagnosis. Here's why.

In highly competitive industries, companies that rise to the top are those who possess a single-minded focus on executing upon their vision but have the flexibility to adapt operationally to accommodate market adjustments. A company suffering from bifurcated vision will not be able to put their full arsenal of development, sales and operational resources toward shared goals and the execution against one vision.

For instance, engineering may be focused on developing product suites that do not help the company win deals because the cto has a very different vision from the ceo. Sales winds up having to sell products that prospects don't want to buy. In the worse case scenario, engineering may tell the business functions that features are not ready due to stretched resources when in actuality, resources are being allocated to the founder's pet code projects that may not have any relevance to sales efforts in the 12-18 month term. Does this sound familiar?

Here's another example of fall-out from a company suffering from bifurcated vision. A start-up "promotes" its cto-founder to the role of evangelist. But his/her vision is not aligned with the company and the executive(s) who have been brought in, usually by the investors, to "take the company to the next level." There is a good likelihood that this newly minted evangelist will be promoting his/her version of the vision. While this may seem innocuous enough, it can create confusion in the market place about the company's direction and value proposition causing unnecessary FUD among customers and other stakeholders.

The fix for the first scenario would be to introduce transparency into resource allocation processes across the company ASAP. This will have the effect of identifying inefficiencies and gaps very quickly. Secondly, it is the CEO's responsibility to have a closed-door discussion with the founder about the situation and put a stop to the practice asap. The absence of both these measures can be disastrous to the company's long term viability.

The second scenario is less complicated and dire. It too requires the CEO or senior board member to have a private conversation with the founder addressing the situation. Companies that can afford this may want to assign an R&D project to the cto for whom the company has outgrown.

Share your anecdotes of bifurcated vision...