There's a real difference between how people operate within organizations versus as independent players. Members of any collective—whether corporate boards, consortiums, or alliances—face constraints that solo entrepreneurs don't. The most successful self-made business leaders often succeed precisely because they can act on conviction without needing consensus. They move on instinct, take calculated risks, and pivot aggressively when markets shift. That kind of bold, even stubborn commitment to a strategy would be nearly impossible in a committee-based structure where every move requires buy-in from multiple stakeholders. The trade-off is obvious: group decisions come with stability and shared responsibility, but they rarely capture that singular, obsessive focus that builds empires.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 9
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
GasWaster69vip
· 01-15 13:40
Going solo really feels way better than just loafing around and waiting to die within an organization.
View OriginalReply0
CryptoMomvip
· 01-15 12:44
Going all in alone is indeed easier; meetings and decision-making can really wear people out.
View OriginalReply0
CrossChainMessengervip
· 01-14 02:46
Going solo is the best—one person makes the decisions, no need to argue with a bunch of people.
View OriginalReply0
ArbitrageBotvip
· 01-13 18:09
Doing things alone is more enjoyable than discussing in meetings, no one holding you back...
View OriginalReply0
DegenTherapistvip
· 01-13 18:09
The difference between working alone and working in a group is indeed significant, but if you ask me, this "lone wolf success theory" sounds appealing but the reality is much more complicated. This statement is a bit too absolute, isn't it? Which true big shot isn't climbing up on the shoulders of a bunch of people?
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainTalkervip
· 01-13 18:02
actually this is wild bc the same dynamics play out in dao governance too—committees just move slower regardless of whether they're wearing suits or holding governance tokens lol. solo founders hit different fr
Reply0
CounterIndicatorvip
· 01-13 18:02
Going solo is the way to go, one person makes the decisions.
View OriginalReply0
HypotheticalLiquidatorvip
· 01-13 18:01
The true risk control paradox... Going solo can indeed be faster, but that "health factor" also collapses the fastest. When one person leverages all-in and makes a bet, a drawdown can lead to immediate chain liquidations with no one to rescue. Although committees are slow, they at least have risk thresholds as a safety net, preventing a single domino collapse from causing a total crash.
View OriginalReply0
LiquiditySurfervip
· 01-13 17:58
Going solo vs. banding together, basically a contest between capital efficiency and decision-making speed... One person surfing can freely adjust their surfing spots, but if they wipe out, no one to relay, which is the cost of liquidity depth.
View OriginalReply0
View More
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)