Observing the current surge in startups and corporate news, I’ve noted a recurring trend of misuse and confusion surrounding basic corporate titles like Founder, Chairman, and CEO. Here are my observations and recommendations for professional clarity.
I. Founder vs. Co-founder: The humility of the beginning
I strongly advise against the prevalent and often indiscriminate use of the English term “Founder” in Vietnamese media and self-descriptions for two key reasons:
- Clarity and language: It’s best to use clear, elegant Vietnamese. Simply calling someone the “Người sáng lập” (The Founder) is perfectly fine and avoids the awkward insertion of a foreign term into an otherwise Vietnamese text.
- The reality of collaboration: I highly recommend that new entrepreneurs (and journalists) use “Đồng sáng lập” (Co-founder) instead. Few companies succeed based on the effort of one person. Leaders should demonstrate humility and acknowledge their colleagues. I would personally be embarrassed to be singularly called “Founder” of anything, as all my achievements bear the mark of many collaborators. Do not self-aggrandize prematurely; acknowledge the collective contribution.
II. Chairman vs. CEO: Understanding the power structure
In Vietnam, the title “Chủ tịch” (Chairman) is often used because it sounds more prestigious or “classy” than “Tổng giám đốc” (CEO). This preference, likely adopted from certain East Asian corporate models, confuses the fundamental principles of modern governance.
Consider these names: Robyn Denholm (Chairman, Tesla), John Thompson (Chairman, Microsoft), and John Hennessy (Chairman, Alphabet/Google). Few people outside of finance know them. Now compare them to Elon Musk, Satya Nadella, and Sundar Pichai—the CEOs. We know the CEOs because they hold the operational power.
The Difference in Role (Governance vs. Execution)
| Title | Core Definition (Global Standard & Law) | Analogy (Political) |
| Chairman (Chủ tịch HĐQT) | Governance and Oversight. Leads the Board of Directors (BOD). Responsible for setting the board’s agenda, overseeing its resolutions, and ensuring the CEO is performing. | Speaker of the House/Parliament. |
| CEO (Tổng giám đốc) | Execution and Strategy. The highest executive officer, ultimately responsible for the day-to-day operation and driving company strategy. Reports to the BOD. | Prime Minister/President. |
The global standard dictates that the CEO holds the highest operational authority. The Chairman, conversely, leads the governance body that supervises the CEO.
The consequence of misuse
When the title “Chủ tịch” is indiscriminately glorified in the media, it leads to several damaging outcomes:
- Undermines the CEO: It reduces the role of the CEO to a figurehead, potentially signaling to the market that the CEO is a puppet.
- Encourages confusion: It blurs the vital line between Governance (setting the rules, oversight) and Execution (running the daily business), a hallmark of poor modern corporate practice.
- Promotes obsolete models: It subconsciously endorses a “family company” model or one dominated by the majority owner, rather than a meritocratic, institutionally managed model.
I advise journalists to use titles accurately. Call key leaders by their actual operational role—Chief Executive Officer (CEO) or Managing Director (Tổng giám đốc/Giám đốc điều hành)—instead of flattering them with the ambiguous honorific “Chủ tịch.” The time for governance clarity is now.
