Public markets aren't broken. Most founders are simply looking at them the wrong way

The biggest lesson I’ve learned from building a public company is that public markets are far more useful than most founders realise.

 

Ask most business owners why they would consider listing a company and the answers tend to be remarkably similar. To raise capital, create liquidity, provide an exit for early investors and to increase visibility. Those are all perfectly reasonable reasons to go public, but I don’t think they are the most interesting ones.

 

Increasingly, I believe the founders who create the most value over the next twenty years will view public markets very differently. Not as a destination, but as tool. Not as a financing event, but as an operating advantage that can strengthen almost every aspect of a business if used correctly. That distinction matters because it changes the role a public company plays.

 

For decades, many founders have treated a stock market listing as the final chapter in a journey. You build a business, reach scale, raise capital, ring the bell, and then focus on meeting market expectations. The public market sits around the business rather than inside it.

 

My experience has been the opposite in that the most valuable aspect of being public has not been access to capital. It has been the ability to build differently.

 

At XCE, we operate executive recruitment businesses. Like most service businesses, our success depends almost entirely on people. We do not manufacture products or own factories. We create value through relationships, expertise, trust, and performance.

 

That creates a challenge every recruitment business owner understands. How do you attract exceptional people? How do you retain them? And how do you align them around a shared long-term objective rather than simply next month’s billing target?

 

Traditionally, recruitment has answered those questions through commission structures. Commission remains one of the industry’s most powerful incentives and I do not believe that will change anytime soon. However, I increasingly believe commission alone is no longer enough.

 

The best recruiters are not simply looking for a larger percentage split. They want participation in the value they help create. They want ownership. They want alignment. They want to know that if they spend years helping build a business, they will share in the upside that follows.

 

That is where public markets become interesting. A listed company creates options that many private businesses struggle to replicate. Equity becomes more useful. Ownership becomes more scalable. Long-term incentive structures become easier to implement. Acquisitions become easier to structure. Capital becomes more flexible.

 

In other words, the public company itself becomes an operating asset. That is a very different way of thinking about a listing, and it is one that extends well beyond talent.

 

One of the most significant shifts taking place in business today is how founders think about their balance sheets. For decades, many operating businesses treated treasury management as an administrative function. Cash accumulated, sat in the bank, and was deployed when required. The objective was preservation rather than optimisation.

 

Today, a growing number of founders are taking a more strategic view. They are asking not only how their operating business creates value, but how their balance sheet contributes to that process as well.

 

That conversation has given rise to new approaches to capital allocation, including the emergence of Bitcoin treasury strategies within public companies. Regardless of where individuals stand on Bitcoin itself, the broader trend is difficult to ignore. Founders are becoming far more deliberate about the role of corporate capital, long-term reserve assets, and shareholder value creation.

 

In my view, this reflects a wider change in thinking. The strongest businesses of the next decade are unlikely to separate operations, incentives, and capital allocation into distinct conversations. Instead, they will increasingly view them as interconnected parts of the same system.

 

At XCE, that means thinking carefully about how our executive recruitment platform, public company structure, capital markets capability, and Bitcoin treasury strategy can strengthen one another over time.

 

The recruitment business generates revenue, relationships, and cash flow. The public company structure helps us attract talent, align incentives, and pursue acquisitions. Capital markets provide access to growth opportunities. The Bitcoin treasury strategy strengthens the balance sheet through a long-term reserve asset approach.

 

Each component serves a different purpose, but the objective is the same: to create a business where growth in one area reinforces growth in another.

 

That is why I believe many discussions about public markets miss the point. The debate is often framed around liquidity, valuation multiples, regulatory burdens, or quarterly reporting cycles. Those factors matter, but they are not the most important consideration.

 

The more interesting question is whether founders are using public markets creatively enough. A public company can be far more than a fundraising vehicle. It can become a platform for attracting talent, aligning stakeholders, making acquisitions, deploying capital intelligently, and creating long-term shareholder value.

 

None of this suggests that public markets are easy. Transparency can be uncomfortable. Reporting requirements can be demanding. Public scrutiny is rarely enjoyable. Every strategic decision is visible and every capital allocation choice is open to evaluation.

 

Yet those same characteristics force management teams to become more intentional. Decisions must be explained. Strategy must be articulated. Capital allocation must be justified. Over time, that discipline tends to produce stronger businesses.

 

This is why I remain optimistic about the future of public markets despite the criticism they often receive. The issue is not that public markets have stopped working. The issue is that many founders are still viewing them through an outdated lens.

 

If the only purpose of a public company is to raise money, then remaining private will often appear more attractive. If, however, a public company becomes a platform for attracting talent, aligning incentives, making acquisitions, allocating capital intelligently, and strengthening the balance sheet, the equation changes completely.

 

That is why I believe we will see a new generation of founder-led businesses embrace public markets over the coming years. Not because regulation becomes lighter or valuations become higher, but because more founders begin to recognise that the listed structure itself can become a competitive advantage.

 

The businesses that create the most value over the next decade are unlikely to be those treating public markets as an exit strategy. They will be the ones using them as a growth strategy.

 

Public markets are not broken. If anything, they remain one of the most underutilised tools available to ambitious founders willing to think differently about how businesses are built.

 

---

 

Scott Ellam is CEO of XCE Connecting Excellence Group

 

Main image courtesy of iStockPhoto.com and Andrii Yalanskyi