> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://docs.contributionism.io/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://docs.contributionism.io/worked-examples-and-evaluation/growth-business-examples.md).

# Growth-business examples

Growth businesses can place particular pressure on contribution-linked systems. Early work may be highly uncertain, while later expansion can rapidly change who contributes and who governs. The examples below illustrate issues to test rather than validated business outcomes.

## **Example A: Rapid workforce growth**

Suppose a product organisation has:

* Two workers in year one.
* Eight workers in year two.
* Twenty workers in year three.

The two founders continue working throughout.

Assume every eligible worker receives 100 units each year, active for three years.

At the end of year three:

* Year-one contributions account for 200 units.
* Year-two contributions account for 800 units.
* Year-three contributions account for 2,000 units.
* Total active participation is 3,000 units.

Each founder holds 300 units, so together they hold 600 units, or 20% of the active financial participation weight.

## **What this reveals**

Even without expiry having materially reduced the founders’ accumulated participation, rapid hiring can reduce their relative share.

That may be appropriate if later work creates much of the organisation’s value.

However, if founders accepted substantial unpaid exposure or created essential assets before hiring, equal annual units may not capture the intended recognition.

Possible responses include:

* Separate repayment of lawful deferred compensation.
* A defined founding contribution allocation.
* Longer durations for compensation rights for particular contributions.
* A capped founding return.
* A different valuation method.

The organisation should avoid responding by creating unexplained permanent founder control.

## **Separate financial recognition from leadership**

Rapid growth may also reduce founders’ voting influence.

A founder leadership mandate can preserve responsibility for an agreed development phase without tying that authority permanently to financial ownership.

The arrangement should specify milestones, limits and review.

Founder financial rewards and founder operational authority should be evaluated separately.

## **Example B: A long-development-cycle product**

Suppose an organisation develops a specialised product over six years and expects meaningful sales only in year seven.

A three-year participation period could expire before the earliest contributors receive any distribution.

This is not necessarily an administrative error. It may reveal that the chosen rights do not fit the business.

The organisation should consider:

* Longer duration periods for compensation and governance rights.
* Milestone-linked periods.
* Contingent claims beginning at commercial launch.
* Defined payout claims.
* Staged financing.
* Explicit acceptance that some rights may expire without payment.

Each approach allocates risk differently.

A right beginning only at commercial launch can remain dormant for a long time. It therefore needs rules for abandonment, restructuring and cancellation.

## **Example C: Moderate growth with extended underpayment**

A small software organisation may increase revenue slowly while repeatedly choosing expansion over repayment of lawful deferred compensation. This creates several risks:

* Historical claims accumulate.
* Early contributors become dependent on uncertain later success.
* New contributors join without understanding the backlog.
* Large risk multipliers create obligations the organisation cannot support.

The model should compare:

* Slower expansion and earlier repayment.
* External finance.
* Reduced commitments.
* Lower-cost operations.
* Continued deferral.

The choice should be an informed financial decision rather than an assumption that future growth will solve every unpaid claim.

## **What growth models should report**

A useful growth model should show:

* Workforce by cohort.
* Contributions by cohort.
* Current compensation.
* Deferred obligations.
* Active compensation and governance rights.
* Voting concentration.
* Distributions.
* Financing costs.
* Cash reserves.
* Expiry.
* Outcomes for people who leave.

Average organisation-wide returns can conceal substantial differences between early and late contributors.