Founders vs Co-founders

What is the correct term to use, or what is the difference between the two?

For instance, if you describe yourself as a founder in a resume it sounds like you founded something alone. In plural form (founders), it suddenly seems more like co-founders - that you didn't do it alone. But I don't know if co-founder alone maybe sounds as if you didn't have a leading role in the founding part.

Hope anyone can clear up my confusion here! Thanks

CC (From Denmark - if the grammar isn't perfect I apologize in advance ;)

Solution 1:

Effectively the two have the same meaning, but have a nuanced difference.

I believe part of what is causing confusion for you is the two meanings of the prefix co- in English.

On the one hand, it means the subordinate position: e.g. Co-chairman, co-pilot

But, in this case, this is using the other definition of co- meaning equal or together.

All co-founders are founders. It just gives the sense of beginning something together. That is, they have worked as a group toward the same goal.

But, founders can mean people who did not necessarily work together. The founders of an artistic movement may never have spoken to one another, but still have been seminal in the movement. Hence, they can be founders, but not typically co-founders.

Solution 2:

"Founders" often refer to people who did the same thing, but separately and, may be,in different periods of times. Founders of a political party ( the main early figures). "Co-founders" is more related to people who gave their contribution together and probably at the same time. Co-founders of a company or a project.