When working as a fractional IP director inside a startup, a practical (and surprisingly strategic) question often comes up:
Should I use the IP group channel (visible to the entire team) when communicating with the C-levels, or should I move to direct messages (DMs) for a more private exchange?
At first glance, it seems like a simple question of etiquette. But in practice, this choice shapes how efficiently the company handles its intellectual property, how information flows, and how the culture of confidentiality evolves.
Let’s unpack both sides.
The Case for Using the IP Group Channel
When strategic IP conversations are visible to the broader team, several good things happen:
- Alignment: Everyone can see how IP decisions connect to R&D, business goals, and future product directions. This builds an IP-aware culture rather than an IP-isolated one.
- Speed: Engineers and scientists can immediately clarify facts or data points, preventing the “telephone game” that slows progress.
- Transparency: Teams understand why certain decisions are made — whether to file, to publish, or to pivot. This reduces friction and helps employees make smarter day-to-day IP choices.
- Training effect: Over time, the open channel becomes a living classroom. Startups grow faster when their teams internalize how IP protects value.
In short, using the shared channel strengthens the company’s IP intelligence — the collective understanding of how ideas become assets.
The Case for Using DMs with C-Levels
But there are situations where discretion matters:
- Sensitivity: Some topics — e.g., licensing negotiations, fundraising positioning, or early investor due diligence — require containment until timing is right.
- Confidence: Executives sometimes need a private space to ask “naïve” questions or explore concerns freely.
- Efficiency: One-on-one exchanges can speed up decisions when context switching is high or discussions are exploratory.
DMs preserve psychological safety. C-levels can reflect and respond without feeling “exposed” in front of the team.
The Balanced Approach – Visibility with Boundaries
In practice, I find the most effective approach is hybrid:
- Start sensitive discussions privately to quickly obtain the necessary information from the C-level executive.
- Then summarize key findings, decisions and action items in the IP group channel.
- This ensures the team sees the logic and direction without breaching confidence.
The result?
- Executives get space for high-level thinking.
- Teams stay aligned and empowered.
- IP strategy becomes integrated, not isolated.
Conclusion
So yes — it’s an etiquette question. But it’s also a strategic one.
Because how a company communicates about IP is often the best predictor of how it will leverage IP.
As a fractional IP director, I view communication design as part of IP strategy. It’s not just what we protect — it’s how we talk about protection that builds real, lasting value.
Key Takeaways:
- Build IP-aware culture through transparency – Use shared channels to educate teams on IP decisions and strengthen collective understanding
- Protect sensitive discussions strategically – Use DMs for confidential topics like negotiations or due diligence, then share appropriate summaries
- Design communication as IP strategy – The way a company discusses IP reveals and shapes how effectively it will leverage intellectual property
