Anna Margolis
3 min readMar 4, 2021


I love this question:

"What are the influences that ought to influence those who are gaining influence?"

You've outlined some great questions here and the terrain you're illuminating is why, as a former lawyer, I have sought to address the delivery of a basic learning curriculum through the process by which a startup team forms its operating agreement.

First off, a big issue is that most people don't even realise that many of the things you're speaking to here are even a thing (embodiment as a generator function, the invisible influences of personal/familial/ancestral trauma and collective or conditioned patterning, micro to macro fractalling of consciousness on tech, to name a few) so in the absence of awareness, which I appreciate you're seeking to address by the very act of writing this article, change is likely to be slow at best.

For those who ARE aware that these things are relevant (particularly among new systems designers/architects or those technologists who have been experimenting with psychedelics for example), it's not enough for one person in the team to be "switched on" to these considerations, because that person won't be able to hold that mantle alone in an environment where there isn't a foundational values alignment and shared reality with their cofounders about the critical nature of these things.

After all, it's common knowledge that the biggest reasons for startup failure are co-founder conflict and running out of money (which is just another way of saying that the team couldn't get coherent enough fast enough before the money ran out) and so a huge amount of this comes down to the participants failures to maintain alignment and healthy relationships with their co-founders, and cultivate the soil bed of the relational fields from which these technologies stem.

Ultimately when it comes to building humane/new paradigm tech, (and at the risk of drastically oversimplifying this for brevity) at a foundational level it requires each individual in the team to learn how to keep their heart open to one another; to begin to learn how to occupy a multi-perspectival awareness and, rather than point fingers and blame others for disappointments, conflicts and failures, to take full responsibility for what they're experiencing in the team dynamic as an essential part of their own evolutionary development process (otherwise it wouldn't be happening), so that they can navigate the terrain of relationship in order to stay together long enough to actually get the job done and bring the tech to fruition from a space of internal and external values alignment.

(When it comes down to it, is it really a surprise that at the root of it all is Love and our ability to consistently occupy that space with one another?!)

But, what I see is that there is still surprisingly little depth of real relationship among teams AND very little self-responsibility being taken in these arenas around what causes the breakdowns. So when the going gets tough, people blame and/or bounce. Or, if they stay, the same old competitive dynamics OR victim/perpetrator consciousness just find their way into the tech.

Hence why it makes sense to address this learning in the context of the agreement that a team forges at the beginning of their relationship with one another; because they know they NEED an agreement, everyone is incentivized to the completion of something in that context, they can't legally anchor the business or secure their ownership interests without one and therefore it offers the ideal opportunity to have the necessary conversations to get into shared reality, up-level collectively (and keep pace with one another in that process) or get out before too much divergence, damage or disappointment occurs.

Thank you for highlighting an important topic and I look forward to discovering what you learn in sending out the beacon.



Anna Margolis

As a former lawyer, Anna merges material world memories, tales of transformation and embodied experience in articulating the future of collaboration