What is a CTO from Startup to IPO

An early CTO is often a technical cofounder who writes code, chooses technology, sets up infrastructure, and fills gaps in a small team. The immediate objective is to produce a minimum viable product and test demand. An elaborate management structure cannot answer the fundamental business question of whether customers want the product in the first place.

Personal output becomes insufficient as the company expands. In the talk's model, moving from a small team to several dozen employees creates a need for hiring, clear responsibilities, and coordinated delivery. Hiring more developers is only part of this work: teams need the capabilities to test and operate what they build. Headcount illustrates the scale of the challenge; it does not establish a universal transition point.

During growth, the CTO increasingly acts as an engineering manager. Team composition, hiring quality, and collaboration with product owners become central concerns. An autonomous team needs a clear objective and the ability to carry work through to completion. Technical leads connect people and remove obstacles. If every decision still requires the CTO, a larger workforce simply creates a longer queue for that person's attention.

Maturity calls for more explicit organizational rules, including career levels, performance assessment, shared goals, and a coherent structure. Architectural and people responsibilities expand at the same time. One person can combine them only up to a point. Distinguishing responsibility for delivery, architecture, and people makes it possible to decide what stays with the CTO and what other leaders should own.

A diversified company has business units alongside platforms and shared services. CTO, CIO, and VP of Engineering can describe different combinations of responsibilities in different organizations. The talk uses Tinkoff as an example of technology leaders in individual business areas working within company-wide IT leadership. Copying job titles without understanding their authority does not reproduce the underlying operating model.

During decline, priorities shift toward costs, retaining valuable expertise, and restructuring the organization. Functions that were previously distributed may need to be centralized. A technology leader's career therefore cannot be measured simply by team size: the work itself changes. Regularly comparing business needs with personal capabilities and the management structure is more useful than treating an established title as proof of readiness for every subsequent stage.