When a founder dependency review is useful

Start with the actual work

Bring a recent decision that returned to you and explain its commercial consequence.

Use a review when the next decision is unclear

A Founder Dependency Review can be useful when several symptoms compete for attention: managers ask for routine approvals, delivery needs rescuing and the founder is considering another senior hire. The decision is not simply whether the business is busy. It is which operating dependency matters first and what evidence supports that choice.

Start with a recent decision that returned to the founder after responsibility appeared to be delegated. Explain the consequence for a customer, delivery commitment, management capacity or commercial choice. Leave assumptions about the cause open to challenge.

Bring examples that do not all support the same story

Gather a small set of appropriate operating records: the request, the handover, the information available and the eventual decision. Include a case the team handled successfully as well as one that returned. Differences between them can reveal a missing boundary, information gap or capacity issue.

Keep personal and confidential details proportionate to the agreed review. Do not assume that a poor outcome proves a person is incapable, or that a successful case proves a whole function is independent. Record what you observed separately from your explanation of it.

Know the scope before paying

The current offer begins with a 30-minute fit call. If the Review is appropriate, the scope, participants, preparation, payment terms and timing are confirmed before commitment. The paid working Review lasts 90 minutes and costs £1,250 plus VAT.

The written decision document identifies the material dependencies examined and priorities for the next 30, 60 and 90 days. It is a bounded diagnostic, not an open-ended implementation engagement. You can use the recommendations with your own team; further support is a separate decision.

Judge the review by the decision it enables

A useful output connects a material dependency to a clear next action, an owner and a review point. It should explain why that action comes before another hire, system or process project, and identify what evidence could change the recommendation.

The Review may be a poor fit for a pre-revenue idea, a business without a team or someone seeking motivation alone. The fit call is the place to establish that. Neither a document nor a scheduled review guarantees that responsibility will transfer; the outcome depends on the business, the people involved and implementation.

What the example does not establish

A review should investigate the cause rather than assume a particular solution.

Look for a case that challenges your first explanation as well as one that supports it. Agree which part of the situation is observed, which is an assumption and which needs another person’s evidence. Keep any proposed change within the authority and commitments already in place.

How do you know whether a change helped?

Record the starting condition and a suitable review point before the change. Compare real cases with similar constraints, including exceptions and any extra work created elsewhere. Separate a prepared document, an implemented change and a tested operating result. If the evidence is incomplete, name the gap rather than treating it as success.