What does it really mean to be a Founding Team member?
The phrase “founding team” has become one of the most attractive labels in venture backed biotech and TechBio. For many candidates, it represents the opportunity to join an ambitious company early, work alongside exceptional founders and contribute to something that could fundamentally change the way we discover, develop or deliver new medicines.
Yet I often find myself wondering whether candidates fully appreciate what that commitment actually involves.
Over the past few years, I’ve had the privilege of helping founders build founding teams across a range of venture backed biotech and TechBio companies. Although each company has pursued a different scientific ambition, whether developing new therapeutics, advancing computational biology or applying technology to long standing challenges in drug discovery, I’ve been struck by how similar the hiring conversations become. Once founders are satisfied that a candidate has the technical capability to do the job, the discussion quickly moves away from qualifications and experience. Instead, it becomes a conversation about mindset.
The people who thrive in founding teams are rarely defined solely by their technical expertise. They tend to share a way of thinking that is much harder to identify on a CV, yet often proves to be the difference between someone who contributes to a company and someone who helps build it.
Joining a founding team is fundamentally different from joining an established company
One of the biggest misconceptions I encounter is the belief that joining a founding team simply working as many hours as possible. In reality, the experience is fundamentally different.
Established organisations benefit from years, sometimes decades, of accumulated knowledge. Reporting lines are clear, responsibilities are well understood and processes exist for almost every situation. Even when challenges arise, there is usually a framework for solving them and someone who ultimately owns the decision.
Founding companies don’t have that luxury.
The science is evolving, the product is evolving and, in many cases, the company itself is still discovering exactly what it wants to become. Priorities change as new data emerges, funding milestones are reached or customer feedback challenges previous assumptions. The role you accept on your first day is therefore unlikely to be the same role you are performing a year later.
For some people, that level of uncertainty is exactly what makes founding companies so rewarding. They enjoy helping shape the direction of a business rather than simply operating within an established structure. Others prefer the clarity and predictability that comes with larger organisations. Neither approach is right or wrong, but recognising which environment suits you is one of the most important career decisions you can make.
Technical excellence is expected. It is rarely the deciding factor.
Every founder I work with sets an exceptionally high technical bar. Whether the role is in biology, computational biology, machine learning, medicinal chemistry or software engineering, technical credibility is a prerequisite.
What I find interesting is that technical ability rarely dominates the conversation once founders begin comparing the strongest candidates. Instead, they begin asking far more nuanced questions:
- How quickly will this person adapt as the company evolves?
- Can they make sensible decisions without complete information?
- Do they naturally think beyond their own discipline?
- Will they strengthen the people around them?
- Are they motivated by the opportunity to build, rather than simply looking for the next career move?
These are difficult questions to answer through a CV or even a technical interview. Yet they are often the questions that determine who ultimately receives an offer.
Founding team members think beyond the boundaries of their role
One observation I’ve made repeatedly is that the strongest founding employees don’t define their contribution by their job description.
In larger organisations, specialisation is both necessary and valuable. As businesses scale, people naturally become experts within clearly defined functions. Founding companies, however, require a different mentality. Success depends upon people who understand that the company’s objectives are more important than the boundaries of their individual role.
That doesn’t mean everyone becomes a generalist. Rather, it means people remain curious about the wider business and willingly contribute wherever they can add value. A computational biologist may help shape product strategy because they understand how customers will interpret scientific outputs. An engineer may influence experimental workflows because they recognise how data quality will affect future model performance. A scientist may contribute to hiring decisions because they understand the capabilities the team will need twelve months from now.
The common thread is not versatility for its own sake. It is ownership of the company’s success rather than ownership of a narrowly defined function.
Comfort with ambiguity is often underestimated
Perhaps the greatest difference between established organisations and founding companies is the amount of ambiguity they contain.
Large organisations are designed to reduce uncertainty. Processes, governance and clearly defined responsibilities all exist to create consistency. Founding companies operate in a very different environment. Scientific discoveries alter priorities, new funding accelerates hiring plans and commercial opportunities emerge unexpectedly. There is rarely a perfect playbook because, by definition, the company is creating something that has not existed before.
I’ve found that the people who flourish in this environment are not necessarily those who always have the answers. More often, they are the people who remain comfortable asking the right questions. They gather information quickly, make thoughtful decisions with the evidence available and remain willing to adapt when new information changes the picture. That ability to move forward without waiting for complete certainty is one of the defining characteristics I see in successful founding team members.
Why “high agency” has become such an important phrase
One phrase I hear repeatedly from founders is “high agency”. It has become something of a shorthand for the type of person they hope to attract, although I suspect different founders define it in slightly different ways.
In my experience, founders who describe someone as having high agency are often talking about people who:
- Recognise what needs to happen next without waiting to be asked.
- Understand the wider context surrounding their work.
- Make thoughtful decisions when there isn’t a predefined process.
- Take responsibility for outcomes rather than simply completing tasks.
- Balance confidence with humility and remain open to better ideas.
High agency, therefore, is less about independence and more about ownership. It is one of several characteristics that consistently appears in exceptional founding team members rather than the single quality that defines them.
Why proximity still matters during the founding stage
Another conversation that has become increasingly common concerns remote working. Candidates understandably value flexibility and founders naturally want access to the best talent available, regardless of geography.
What I’ve found, however, is that founders rarely talk about being together because they want to supervise people more closely. Instead, they recognise that communication becomes one of the company’s greatest competitive advantages during its earliest stages.
Founding companies are still building their systems, culture and ways of working. Some of the most important decisions emerge from informal conversations that happen between meetings rather than within them. A discussion around a whiteboard, an unexpected scientific observation or a spontaneous conversation after an experiment can change the direction of a project remarkably quickly.
As companies mature, remote collaboration often becomes much easier because the supporting structures already exist. During the founding stage, those structures are still being created. Spending meaningful time together is often less about where people work and more about how quickly the team can learn, solve problems and build trust.
Equally, I don’t believe founders should limit themselves to hiring only the people who happen to live nearby. One of the most rewarding aspects of my role has been introducing founders to exceptional individuals they would never have met through their local network alone. Time and again I’ve seen candidates relocate internationally because they recognised the opportunity to become part of something genuinely special. The very best founding opportunities often inspire people to make decisions they would never consider for a more established organisation.
Is becoming a founding team member right for you?
Before pursuing a founding opportunity, it’s worth asking yourself a few honest questions:
- Do I enjoy uncertainty, or do I perform best within established structures?
- Am I motivated by building something new, or by optimising something that already exists?
- Am I comfortable working outside the boundaries of my job description?
- Do I enjoy collaborating across different disciplines?
- Would I relocate or make personal sacrifices for a genuinely exceptional opportunity?
- Am I looking for responsibility, or simply a different job?
There are no right or wrong answers. Some of the best scientists and leaders thrive within large organisations, while others are energised by the pace and unpredictability of an early stage company. The important thing is understanding which environment allows you to do your best work.
Building is a mindset
The more time I spend working with founders and founding teams, the more convinced I become that joining a founding company is not simply another career move. It is a conscious decision to embrace uncertainty, accept broader responsibility and contribute to building something that does not yet fully exist.
Time and again, I see the strongest founding team members combining many of the same characteristics:
- Technical excellence.
- Ownership.
- Curiosity.
- Sound judgement.
- Learning velocity.
- Humility.
- Systems thinking.
- A genuine desire to build.
No one possesses these qualities perfectly, but the people who consistently succeed demonstrate many of them, often long before they become obvious on a CV.
Over the coming months, I’ll be exploring these themes in greater depth, from what founders really mean when they talk about high agency to why learning velocity, judgement and systems thinking have become increasingly valuable in venture backed Biotech and TechBio companies.
Because after helping founders build teams over the past few years, I’ve become convinced of one thing.
Exceptional companies aren’t built simply by exceptional science. They’re built by exceptional founding teams.
Leave a Reply