Startups are dreamlike: innovation, speed, freedom, impact. They attract ambitious profiles who want to build something, learn quickly, and see the concrete results of their work.
But behind this image, the reality is very particular: a startup is not a “small big company.” It is an environment in constant construction, where many things do not exist yet, where priorities shift quickly, and where everyone must contribute directly to moving the company forward.
Before joining a startup — and before recruiting there — it is essential to understand what it entails on a daily basis: uncertainty, a blank slate, autonomy, flexibility… and a simple requirement: deliver.
Quand on rejoint une startup, on ne signe pas seulement un contrat. On signe un contexte.
Many recruitments in startups fail for a simple reason: the misunderstanding is not technical... it is cultural.
In a large company, most things are already in place: processes, documentation, tools, pricing, legal framework, internal routines, support, validations, well-defined roles, budgets, specialized teams.
In a startup, it is often the opposite. You come to build, not to “take a place” in an already stable system. And that changes everything.
The golden rule: you do, you do not have someone else do
In a startup, the value of a collaborator is not only measured by their ability to lead, organize, coordinate, or ask.
It is measured by their ability to produce, test, deliver, iterate. This does not mean “doing anything” or “working like a madman.”
This means that at the beginning, and often for a long time, one must be capable of:
create the document that does not exist
write the missing process
define the pricing grid that has never been formalized
prepare a "clean" business proposal
framing a client need without a support team
find solutions rather than report problems
In short: less delegation, more execution.
In a large organization, one can be excellent at orchestrating. In a startup, one must first be excellent at building.
The comfort of large companies... does not exist yet
In an established company, one benefits from a “system”:
Legal prepares contractual templates
Finance provides the rules and tools
Marketing creates content and the pitch
Sales Ops defines CRM, KPIs, and methods
IT manages tools, access, workflows
Quality documents, standardizes, and improves
In a startup, this system is often to be invented. And there is a common trap: recruiting someone who has a very good level… in an already structured environment, and then discovering that they are lost when everything needs to be created.
The issue is not competence. The issue is the ability to go from “zero-to-one”.
More autonomy = more expectations
It is often said: “in a startup, we have more autonomy.”
That’s true. But we must say the rest:more autonomy = more responsibilities.
This means:
moins de validation hiérarchique
moins de “filets de sécurité”
moins d’instructions détaillées
moins de soutien disponible “à la demande”
plus de décisions à prendre, vite, avec des infos imparfaites
This autonomy can be extremely motivating… or extremely stressful, depending on the profiles.
Flexibility as operational reality
Another major difference: flexibility is not a “cultural bonus.” It is a condition for survival. Priorities shift quickly. Emergencies arise without warning. Yesterday's assumptions become false tomorrow.
The startup collaborator must accept that :
le plan change
la roadmap évolue
les tâches ne sont pas toujours “propres”
le périmètre est souvent plus large que la fiche de poste
il faut parfois faire aujourd’hui ce qui n’était pas prévu
This requires a mindset : adaptation + pragmatism + tolerance for uncertainty.
The true duty of leaders: to prevent, frame, and support
This is where leaders have a direct responsibility: Recruiting in a startup is not just about “finding talent.” It’s also protecting the relationship by clarifying the reality from the start. Warning is not scaring, it’s avoiding a costly disappointment for everyone.
Leaders should explicitly say before a commitment:
“You will have to build things that do not exist.”
“There will be few processes at the beginning, and you will have to help create them.”
“You will have autonomy, but we expect results and a strong execution capability.”
“There will be changes in priorities: you need to be comfortable with that.”
“We are looking for a builder profile, not just a manager profile.”
Et devraient vérifier en entretien:
Does the person like starting from a blank page?
Have they ever delivered in a vague context?
Do they know how to do without support, without a team, without a model?
Are they capable of being operational quickly?
Do they know how to prioritize and arbitrate without waiting for instructions?
Warning signals: when this risks going wrong
The goal is not to judge. It is to detect early a context misalignment.
In a startup, a bad alignment quickly costs a lot: energy, time, team dynamics, clients… and sometimes even internal credibility.
Warning signals on candidate side
These signals do not mean “bad profile”. They often indicate that the person is more suited to an already structured environment and may need more support.
Expectation of a complete framework from the start
“What is the exact process?”, “Where is the documentation?”, “What proposal model do we use?”
Reflex of too quick delegation
“We will ask someone…”, “This is not my area…”, “We need a dedicated team.”
High need for validation and arbitration
Difficulty deciding without instruction, constant need for approval, fear of making mistakes.
Strong discomfort with uncertainty
Visible stress when priorities shift, refusal to work with imperfect information.
Rejection of “non-noble” tasks
Refusal of operational topics, resistance to “getting hands dirty”.
Discourse centered on status rather than impact
The title, the organizational chart, the responsibilities “on paper” take precedence over what needs to be built.
Warning signals on leaders / startups side
Sometimes, the problem does not come from the candidate, but from an implicit promise (or a lack of clarity).
Recruitment pitch too “corporate”
We sell stability, clear roles, a fixed scope… while the reality will be fluid.
Unrealistic or too vague job description
Either we promise “a clear position” when it is not, or we write “you will do everything” without priorities.
Lack of minimum support / onboarding
“You are autonomous” does not mean “figure it out”. Without context, objectives, and benchmarks, even a good profile can get lost.
Lack of prioritization by top management
When everything is urgent, nothing is. Result: the employee gets exhausted and the startup does not progress.
Hiring a “manager” when we mainly need a “builder”
A startup in the 0→1 phase needs building. Hiring too early a profile focused only on “structuring / steering” can create frustration and inertia.
Implicit promise of resources that will not exist
“We will hire soon,” “marketing will produce,” “legal will frame”… while no one is there.
Succeeding in the integration of executives
Executives play a key role in a startup — not only because they bring experience, methodology, or a network, but because they spread a mindset.
In the growth phase, a startup is not built only with a good product: it is built with a culture of execution. And this culture is transmitted daily, by example. An executive who deeply understands the startup context (blank page, shifting priorities, iteration, responsibility) becomes a mindset amplifier: it shows how to decide quickly, how to move forward despite uncertainty, how to deliver without waiting for everything to be perfect.
Conversely, an executive who reproduces “corporate” reflexes (waiting for processes, over-structuring, early delegation, seeking constant validation) can slow down the team, create frustration, and establish a culture of excuses or inertia.
That is why the challenge is not just to “recruit executives,” but to integrate and support them properly, so that they become a lever for performance… and a cultural reference for the organization.
A startup manager needs autonomy… but autonomy is not decreed. It is made possible through a few very concrete benchmarks. Without that, even an excellent profile can become exhausted, scattered, or misprioritize.
The goal is not to “corporatize” the startup. The goal is to provide just enough structure to allow for rapid and healthy execution.
Tell the truth… then repeat it (onboarding = reality + context)
The messages “startup = we build” must be clarified upon arrival, not just in interviews.
To be addressed from the first week:
What is ready / what is not
The real priorities (not the wishlist)
The gray areas where we will need to invent
The limits: what we will not do (yet)
A good startup onboarding is mainly about clarity.
Provide a compass: mission, objectives, and definition of success
A manager must know what is expected of them, otherwise they do “a lot” without doing “the right thing”.
Very concrete:
a mission written in 5 lines
3 objectives over 90 days (not 12)
a clear definition of “it’s successful” (measurable or observable)
Freedom without goals is wandering.
Establish a simple (and non-negotiable) management rhythm
No need for heavy processes. A minimum of rituals is enough:
1 short weekly point (priorities / blockages / decisions to be made)
1 monthly review (results / learnings / adjustments)
1 “decisions” channel (to keep a record)
The management mainly needs quick access to decisions.
Clarify the decision-making rules: who decides what, when, and how
One of the major stresses in a startup is ambiguity:
Can I decide alone?
How far?
When do I need to escalate?
Define a simple rule, for example:
“You decide as long as it doesn't impact X (cash, brand, legal, key client)”
“If it exceeds Y CHF or Z days, we validate together”
Autonomy becomes fluid when the boundaries are clear.
Provide the minimum "ready-to-use" tools
We don't need 40 tools. But we need to avoid wasting time:
a commercial proposal template
a “contracts” folder with 2–3 basic templates
a Notion/Drive “references” page (pitch, pricing, offers, FAQ)
a CRM or a simple pipeline (even minimalist)
In a startup, documentation is not a luxury: it is an accelerator.
Protect the construction time (otherwise we remain in urgency)
Executives are often drawn into: operations, emergencies, micro-topics, and/or customer support.
If you want them to structure, you need to guarantee them “builder” time:
½ day per week dedicated to building
or 2 blocks of 2 hours that are untouchable
Without that, they "manage" instead of "building".
Encourage experimentation... with safeguards
In a startup, we move forward through testing. But an executive must know what can be tested quickly and what needs to be secured (legal, security, reputation)
Simple rule:
“Quick and reversible test = go”
“Risky or irreversible test = validation”
Innovation works when the risk is managed.
Coaching "startup mindset": direct, rapid, useful feedback
Executives coming from large companies may need a gentle recalibration:
priority to impact and deliverables
short iterations rather than perfection
useful documentation rather than perfect documentation
decisions with 70% information rather than waiting for 100%
Good support means frequent and concrete feedback, not an annual review.
When a collaborator gets stuck : getting out of the “blank page syndrome”
In a startup, the "blank page syndrome" often occurs. It is not necessarily a lack of skill, it is sometimes a normal reaction to an environment where everything needs to be invented: no model, no standard, no internal example, little feedback, and an implicit pressure to "get it right."
The problem is that this blockage can become costly:
strategic issues are stagnating,
decisions are delayed,
the collaborator loses confidence,
and the team is moving slower.
Identify the real blockage (it is not always the same cause)
Before “correcting”, you need to understand. Common causes:
fear of making a mistake (so we write nothing)
lack of prioritization (too many possible directions)
absence of method (blank page = paralysis)
too little business context (especially among very expert profiles)
lack of sparring (person to challenge, structure, validate)
Provide a simple method to unlock
Often, it is enough to bring back movement with simple rules :
deliver a version 0.1 in 48 hours (even if imperfect)
cut into micro-deliverables (1 page, 1 table, 1 diagram)
validate a "cap" rather than a final result
prioritize: "what creates the most impact this week?"
But sometimes, despite everything, the collaborator needs an external eye.
The underutilized option: an external sparring partner
In this case, a manager can propose occasional external support , not to “replace” the collaborator, but to help them move forward :
clarify the ideas
structure an action plan
challenge assumptions
establish a methodological framework
secure a strategic decision
accelerate the production of deliverables (pricing, go-to-market, pitch, offer, process, etc.)
At Ectos, this is typically the role we play : sparing partner for the manager and/or the collaborator, with a very pragmatic results-oriented approach. The goal is to allow the collaborator to regain momentum, while securing important topics for the company.
Be mindful of the feeling: “I am supported” ≠ “I am being challenged”
The sensitive point: a collaborator may perceive this initiative as an affront (“I am not trusted”, “I am being replaced”, “it is thought that I am not capable”).
That is why the form matters as much as the content.
The message to convey is simple :
“This is not a judgment, it is support.”
“I want to give you a sparring partner to help you structure and accelerate.”
“The goal is to make you stronger and faster in this environment.”
“We do this to protect your energy and maximize your chances of success.”
And this can come from both sides :
from the manager, who wants to help and secure execution,
from the collaborator, who wants an external perspective to unblock and progress.
When well presented, external support often produces :
better clarity and prioritization,
faster deliverables,
less internal friction,
more trust,
and an accelerated skill development in startup logic.