Does nixing C-suite titles really help a company? Outschool thinks so.

Outschool’s co-founder says the system has allowed his company to focus on impact, not status.

Amir Nathoo, co-founder and head of Outschool

Outschool, like a growing list of companies that includes Stripe, Gusto, Polygon and MassMutual, shirks the traditional title hierarchy of managers, directors and vice presidents.

Photo: Outschool

Don’t call Amir Nathoo a CEO. Since last year, his title has been “head of Outschool,” the online learning company he co-founded in 2015. The same goes for the rest of his executive team, where there isn’t a chief-anything in sight.

Outschool, like a growing list of companies that includes Stripe, Gusto, Polygon and MassMutual, shirks the traditional title hierarchy of managers, directors and vice presidents. Instead, the company is run by executive “heads” and middle- and upper-management “leads,” where leads can report to leads and both leads and heads can report to heads.

“We wanted to take a different approach that kind of reduces or de-emphasizes hierarchy and status,” Nathoo told Protocol.

Outschool largely modeled its system of titles after Stripe, but took it a step further, removing even C-suite titles (a move that Polygon also made last year). Similar to the payments giant, though, Outschool uses an internal org chart as a reference for employees’ actual job descriptions and the size of their teams.

Nathoo walked me through how this all works. This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Why did you decide to get rid of most titles?

Traditionally, titles at companies reflect your place in the hierarchy, your level of management. You have your managers, directors, senior directors, VPs, senior VPs, executive VPs, C-suite.

The reason this felt off for us was this idea that it’s almost like military ranks, where we’re making it very visible, the difference between people’s status.

Hierarchy in management is important so you know who to go to, who your manager is for guidance or direction, or for career discussions. But in most work in our company, it’s not the case that I wanted the person with the biggest title or highest in the hierarchy to necessarily be the decision-maker in the room.

Secondly, for us in particular, it matches our mission to inspire a love of learning as opposed to seeing education as something you do in order to acquire grades or certifications. Internally, we should be focused on the work itself, not on the status aspects of it.

What’s one way that this system has made for better outcomes at Outschool?

One specific area is we organize our exec team to not just be my direct reports, but to be all heads in the company. That leads to more voices around the table and a more diverse group in terms of the functions represented and the ideas represented. That’s made our annual planning process better, because there’s more visibility and more involvement from more leaders in the company.

Has this also simplified the way you handle compensation?

Compensation is tied to the level. You could be a head, and there are multiple levels within that title, and there are multiple different levels within “lead.”

We then do the compensation by levels so that even if your title is not changing regularly, because we have so few titles, your compensation can be increasing regularly as you get promoted and uplevel your capabilities. We have standard salary bands that we think are competitive in today’s market.

What’s the cost of a title? A title can be tied to compensation. What’s your philosophy on that?

Some people take a different view and say: Hey, titles are free. Why not just give people a big title to make them feel good, or even substitute for other things, like pay or equity?

On the surface, that seems reasonable: It doesn’t cost anything. But I think there is this hidden cost, where you are emphasizing that status, that seniority. I think that can lead to more political environments and less productive environments.

Did internal strife over titles lead to this change?

No, not at all. It was proactive. I wanted to put it in place before we got to the point where there would be continuous discussion over titles because I’ve seen what can happen at other growth companies through my network.

I arrived at this belief that a different approach was more in tune with where Outschool was growing. During the pandemic, we grew very fast, from 25 people to 180 people. All along that journey, it became clear that we were going to introduce an executive team and middle management. It was at that point proactively that I decided to make the change.

How will this model work as Outschool grows? Will it get confusing when you’re double or triple the size you are now?

One thing that gives me confidence about that is Stripe’s example. We’ve taken it a little bit further than Stripe because they have C-level heads and leads, but it’s still the same principle, and they have scaled to many thousands of people and have heads reporting to heads and leads reporting to leads.

Perhaps it’s confusing at times internally to know, is this head I’m talking to responsible for a 10-person organization or a 1,000-person organization within the company? The question then becomes: Does that actually matter to the work? And can that easily be solved just by having an org chart?

Do you worry that this system is a turn-off to executive candidates who might want a C-level title?

We have seen that some candidates are put off by this. It’s a minority, and we regard that as a good thing. I don’t want leaders in the company who don’t buy into that philosophy that status is not the important thing — impact is. I regard it as an effective filter given that we are an impact-oriented company.

I think there can be a concern that if you’re called the “head of,” when you’re looking for your next role, recruiters might look at that and think, “Oh, they haven’t held a C-level position.” We encourage our people to describe the work that they actually do, making it clear that it is C-level, and I commit, when doing references, to verifying that so that we don’t negatively impact people’s careers.


Inside Amazon’s free video strategy

Amazon has been doubling down on original content for Freevee, its ad-supported video service, which has seen a lot of growth thanks to a deep integration with other Amazon properties.

Freevee’s investment into original programming like 'Bosch: Legacy' has increased by 70%.

Photo: Tyler Golden/Amazon Freevee

Amazon’s streaming efforts have long been all about Prime Video. So the company caught pundits by surprise when, in early 2019, it launched a stand-alone ad-supported streaming service called IMDb Freedive, with Techcrunch calling the move “a bit odd.”

Nearly four years and two rebrandings later, Amazon’s ad-supported video efforts appear to be flourishing. Viewership of the service grew by 138% from 2020 to 2021, according to Amazon. The company declined to share any updated performance data on the service, which is now called Freevee, but a spokesperson told Protocol the performance of originals in particular “exceeded expectations,” leading Amazon to increase investments into original content by 70% year-over-year.

Keep Reading Show less
Janko Roettgers

Janko Roettgers (@jank0) is a senior reporter at Protocol, reporting on the shifting power dynamics between tech, media, and entertainment, including the impact of new technologies. Previously, Janko was Variety's first-ever technology writer in San Francisco, where he covered big tech and emerging technologies. He has reported for Gigaom, Frankfurter Rundschau, Berliner Zeitung, and ORF, among others. He has written three books on consumer cord-cutting and online music and co-edited an anthology on internet subcultures. He lives with his family in Oakland.

Sponsored Content

Great products are built on strong patents

Experts say robust intellectual property protection is essential to ensure the long-term R&D required to innovate and maintain America's technology leadership.

Every great tech product that you rely on each day, from the smartphone in your pocket to your music streaming service and navigational system in the car, shares one important thing: part of its innovative design is protected by intellectual property (IP) laws.

From 5G to artificial intelligence, IP protection offers a powerful incentive for researchers to create ground-breaking products, and governmental leaders say its protection is an essential part of maintaining US technology leadership. To quote Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo: "intellectual property protection is vital for American innovation and entrepreneurship.”

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.

Wall Street is warming up to crypto

Secure, well-regulated technology infrastructure could draw more large banks to crypto.

Technology infrastructure for crypto has begun to mature.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

Despite a downturn in crypto markets, more large institutional investors are seeking to invest in crypto.

One factor holding them back is a lack of infrastructure for large institutions compared to what exists in the traditional, regulated capital markets.

Keep Reading Show less
Tomio Geron

Tomio Geron ( @tomiogeron) is a San Francisco-based reporter covering fintech. He was previously a reporter and editor at The Wall Street Journal, covering venture capital and startups. Before that, he worked as a staff writer at Forbes, covering social media and venture capital, and also edited the Midas List of top tech investors. He has also worked at newspapers covering crime, courts, health and other topics. He can be reached at or


How I decided to go all-in on a federal contract — before assignment

Amanda Renteria knew Code for America could help facilitate access to expanded child tax credits. She also knew there was no guarantee her proof of concept would convince others — but tried anyway.

Code for America CEO Amanda Renteria explained how it's helped people claim the Child Tax Credit.

Photo: Code for America

Click banner image for more How I decided series

After the American Rescue Plan Act passed in March 2021, the U.S. government expanded child tax credits to provide relief for American families during the pandemic. The legislation allowed some families to nearly double their tax benefits per child, which was especially critical for low-income families, who disproportionately bore the financial brunt of the pandemic.

Keep Reading Show less
Hirsh Chitkara

Hirsh Chitkara ( @HirshChitkara) is a reporter at Protocol focused on the intersection of politics, technology and society. Before joining Protocol, he helped write a daily newsletter at Insider that covered all things Big Tech. He's based in New York and can be reached at


This carbon capture startup wants to clean up the worst polluters

The founder and CEO of point-source carbon capture company Carbon Clean discusses what the startup has learned, the future of carbon capture technology, as well as the role of companies like his in battling the climate crisis.

Carbon Clean CEO Aniruddha Sharma told Protocol that fossil fuels are necessary, at least in the near term, to lift the living standards of those who don’t have access to cars and electricity.

Photo: Carbon Clean

Carbon capture and storage has taken on increasing importance as companies with stubborn emissions look for new ways to meet their net zero goals. For hard-to-abate industries like cement and steel production, it’s one of the few options that exist to help them get there.

Yet it’s proven incredibly challenging to scale the technology, which captures carbon pollution at the source. U.K.-based company Carbon Clean is leading the charge to bring down costs. This year, it raised a $150 million series C round, which the startup said is the largest-ever funding round for a point-source carbon capture company.

Keep Reading Show less
Michelle Ma

Michelle Ma (@himichellema) is a reporter at Protocol covering climate. Previously, she was a news editor of live journalism and special coverage for The Wall Street Journal. Prior to that, she worked as a staff writer at Wirecutter. She can be reached at

Latest Stories