This puts founder's syndrome into a new light...I myself have been guilty of thinking before that it would be great for various organizations to have new blood - organizations that I thought were paying the price of being a founder-led organization.  I guess one doesn't truly know the pros and cons of being a founder until one actually experineces it....instead we tend to look from afar and judge.  Too bad for us judgers.

I am a founder so I thank you for this post! I always cringe when I hear the term "Founders Syndrome" and feel that founders are not appreciated. So thank you!  And as a founder , I thank you for teaching us new methods to improve and increase our capacity so that our organization can grow and be all I have wished for it!

As a fairly young arts manage at the ripe old age of 29, this concept was heavily discussed during my graduate work in arts administration.  For me, I believe one of the most important ways to improve the capacity of the "next generation" is for founders to make sure and share the history, passion, and knowledge with their staff and especially anyone who may be being groomed to take the reins should that time come.  Having a devoted founder is the staple of any good arts organization I would think, but unless the next generation is trained with that same fervor, the founder's knowledge is lost forever and the organization will ultimately suffer the consequences.

as i wrote my title i realized there was an unintended double entendre there.  i meant to be referencing the idea of managing change.  but then again in this discussion the changing of management is also apropos.

what i think about founder's syndrome is that it's attitudinal more than anything.  years ago the very brilliant film-maker Esther Robinson (who used to be with Creative Capital and now works on artist housing in New York) said to me 'there isn't any such thing as old and young anymore, it's old thought and new thought'.

What I've found is that founders and their allies can be resistant to change that is necessary for the health of the organization.  While the Michael Kaiser principle of great art well marketed is a timeless truism - the environment can require constant adaptation in order to successfully market the art (to the public or to funders).  Founders who are stuck in an old paradigm, or surrounding themselves with people who are tried and true supporters without new contributions (and even worse when they are without the ability to donate or facilitate donations), can be prone to Founders Syndrome.  Founders who are flexible, supporting the next generation (as the previous commenter mentioned), and involved in continuous learning are more likely to have both great art and terrific marketing.

Yes they are our heroes - and there is no doubt that both the history and the present of the performing arts is full of people who have survived in spite of the overwhelming odds - they are brilliant and worthy of ongoing support.  But in a community and an economy where viability relies on the ability to adapt - let's hope that Founders will put themselves in the new thought camp, while bringing their experience and longevity to the table as an asset rather than a roadblock. 

otherwise it probably is time to change management because they weren't able to manage change.