The Founder Who Won

THE CASE

Vishal Garg founded Better in 2014 and ran it for twelve years, through a 2023 stock-market listing after which the shares collapsed. Most people know him for a Zoom call in 2021 on which he dismissed some nine hundred staff. He apologised, stepped back for a few weeks and returned.

On 27 July a hedge fund manager, Daniel Lewis, joined the board. Garg says he had advised him for months and that he welcomed him in. A week later the board removed Garg. The first announcement called the exit mutual. The second, a fortnight on, said the directors had voted without him, citing his judgment, temperament and credibility. The gap between the two statements did much of the damage. Garg stayed on the board, now sitting in rooms where he was the subject.

He moved fast. Within days he claimed a majority of the votes, retained a prominent litigator and offered to work for a dollar a year. The company sued him and he sued back. The board adopted a poison pill and formed a committee that left him out. A co-founder who served as legal chief was put on leave.

On 30 September written consents from just over half the shares removed five directors. Garg, briefly the only director, appointed four more, and by 5 October the interim chief executive was gone. The company withdrew its challenge. Better now has a founder in control, a board of his choosing, and no chief executive.

The story has no scene in which anyone asks what winning is for.

THREE QUESTIONS FOR THE PSYCHIATRIST

1.The chair rings you four days after the removal. Garg still holds a board seat, and the first announcement called his exit mutual. How should a founder who has just lost the chief executive role be handled while he remains a director, and what would you watch for in the room?

2.Suppose a founder in his position tells you he is energised, sleeping little and certain he will win. How do you tell resolve from narrowing judgement, and what would you ask him before his next move?

3.Eight weeks on he has won. There is no chief executive, the directors who removed him have gone and the staff have watched all of it. What would you tell the new board about the first ninety days, and what would you say to him about who he is now that he has what he fought for?

MODEL ANSWER GUIDE

"In this world there are only two tragedies. One is not getting what one wants, and the other is getting it." Oscar Wilde, Lady Windermere's Fan

Question one. Start with how it feels. Wasserman found that founders are most likely to be replaced when things go well, at the product milestone or the funding round, because the company now needs different skills. Studies of ousted founders describe a loss of identity and self-worth, often with shame and self-blame, and one interview study links stronger attachment to the firm with heavier grief. So a founder who keeps his seat is mourning in the very room where it happened. Think about what a "mutual" announcement does to trust once the truth emerges. Give him a defined role and a dignified way out, and keep the board process clean enough to defend. Forbes and Milliken add that candour helps a board and personal feuds corrode it.

Question two. Being certain and being right feel identical from the inside. Chatterjee and Hambrick found that CEOs high on narcissism markers favour bold, attention-getting moves that bring big wins and big losses, but no better results on average. Hold that as a hypothesis about style, never a label. Then ask the plain things. What is winning for? What would you accept if you lost? How are you sleeping? Who is allowed to tell you no?

Question three. A review of CEO turnover, mostly in health care, found instability, lost talent and sagging morale, and the staff here had no vote. For the first ninety days, think of a chief executive, a founder role that is not that job, and somewhere conflict can be said out loud. Wasserman's "rich or king" choice is worth putting to him gently, because few people get both.

READING

Wasserman N (2003) Founder-CEO succession and the paradox of entrepreneurial success. Organization Science 14(2):149-172. Chatterjee A, Hambrick DC (2007) It's all about me: narcissistic chief executive officers. Administrative Science Quarterly 52(3):351-386. Forbes DP, Milliken FJ (1999) Cognition and corporate governance: boards as strategic decision-making groups. Academy of Management Review 24(3):489-505. Aaltonen O, Forced Exit: Experiences of Ousted Entrepreneurs, Turku School of Economics (thesis). Factors associated with health CEO turnover: a scoping review, PubMed Central PMC11288093.

STORY SOURCES AND NOTE

Bloomberg, 30 Sep 2026; Inman, 20 Aug and 6 Oct 2026; HousingWire, Aug 2026; BoardroomAlpha, 7 Oct 2026; Gulf News, Aug 2026. Teaching case drawn from public reporting. Some claims are contested.