[SavageBeast]

"I have had several conflicts with founders because I act outside of my scope (I.E, I do things they think is a waste of my time: like budget forecasts, headcount plans, retrospectives of milestones and previously I was doing the product roadmap- which I definitely agree is out of scope)."

The founders hate it when you use numbers, facts and analysis to come up with very good reasons not to implement their latest Great Idea on demand. I presume you were the one that actually implemented a Product Roadmap to keep founders out of the weeds in the first place.

[dijit]

> I presume you were the one that actually implemented a Product Roadmap to keep founders out of the weeds in the first place.

Wow, spot on.

The issue was that the team was being pulled from pillar to post and could never focus on anything for more than 5 minutes before having a different highest priority task foisted onto them, requiring them to change focus immediately and abandon progress.

By forcing a roadmap I gave the dev teams a week or so to work on something a little more undisturbed before moving onto the next thing. This massively increased our throughput and the quality of the outcome, but it was not popular with the founders because it forced the founders to crystallise ideas and prioritise them properly for the resources we had.

[SavageBeast]

Technical Cofounder here: I presume we're all living some parallel life. Forcing founders/investors/biz people to think it even 10% through was always really hard. It's like they have some kind of dopamine addiction that only NEW SHIT EVERY DAY can scratch. They live in a sort of dream world and simply cannot STAND being pulled back into reality.

One of the worst books ever published was that damn Steve Jobs biography by Walter Isaacson. The week after that was published literally everyone with a laptop was a demanding asshole with ridiculous ideas they now felt compelled to beat everyone else into because IT WORKED FOR STEVE AMIRITE!!!???