Ask HN: Difference of implication between co-founders
We agree on almost everything (vision, equity, responsibilities)
However, there is one issue where we cannot come to an agreement: how to manage a difference of implication between the co-founders. I have no girlfriend/family and very little responsibilities, so I can and expect to put all of my time into this venture (minus sleep, eating and exercice). However, one of the founders has a family and the responsibilities that come with it, so the effort he can put in is more limited. The french 35h/week is ok for him, he can maybe do more sometimes, but with no guarantee.
My question: how can I manage the likely difference of implication, when it comes to equity/compensation and the implicit contract we have between each other.
I see a few possibilities:
- Tolerate it: each co-founder has equal equity and is expected to work 35h/week. More effort is not rewarded. I suspect this will be highly demotivating for high performers.
- Ban it: set a minimum of 50 or 60h/week, and refuse anyone who cannot pull it off. I am good friends with all my co-founders, so I don't like the idea of them not joining because they have a family. Besides, most of us will start a family at some point.
- Measure and scale: find some way of measuring implication and reward everyone including co-founders proportional to it. This introduces the problem having to measure, estimate or self-report the implication of each one.
Thoughts?