Alex Clug

A tech team evaluates project evidence to avoid the sunk cost fallacy. A tech project should be killed when the remaining investment is no longer justified by realistic future value, strategic fit, technical feasibility, and opportunity cost. The sunk cost fallacy in tech development happens when you keep funding work because of what you’ve already spent, rather than what the project can still return. This article helps you decide whether to continue, pivot, pause, or cancel a software project without turning the decision into a blame exercise. You’ll get practical signals, decision tests, and kill criteria you can use before the next roadmap review, steering meeting, or engineering planning cycle. What Is The Sunk Cost Fallacy In Tech Development? The sunk cost fallacy in tech development  is the habit of continuing a project because you’ve already invested time, money, effort, architecture, political capital, or team identity into it. Those investments are alrea...

Boardroom debate over control, investor rights, and hidden governance power. Tab 1 Boardroom power struggles happen when the cap table says one thing, but legal authority, investor rights, board behavior, and informal influence say another. Boardroom power struggles are rarely about ownership alone; they're about who can decide, block, persuade, delay, replace, or redirect. This article explains why the visible ownership record does not fully reveal control. You'll see how board seats, veto rights, observer access, chair authority, director relationships, weak assessments, founder-investor tension, and activist pressure can reshape power long before a formal vote happens. Who Really Controls A Company: Shareholders, The Board, Or The Chief Executive Officer? The board usually holds the formal authority to direct the company's business and affairs, unless the company's governing documents say otherwise. Shareholders own economic interests, and the chief executive officer...

A CEO and leadership team assess when to shift from growth mode to survival mode. A Chief Executive Officer (CEO)  should shift from growth mode to survival mode when the current plan depends on assumptions the company no longer controls: easy funding, fast payback, stable margins, strong demand, or enough cash runway to absorb mistakes. The wartime CEO mentality is a temporary operating discipline for protecting the company when survival risk becomes real. This article explains what that shift looks like, which warning signs matter, and how you can act without turning urgency into chaos. You’ll see how to compare growth mode with survival mode, review the financial triggers, communicate with your team, and know when it’s safe to move back toward growth. What The “Wartime CEO” Mentality Really Means The wartime CEO mentality  starts with a specific condition: the company faces an existential threat. Ben Horowitz’s peacetime versus wartime model de...