What Two Signed Severance Deals Say About Automattic's 33-Hour Leadership Gap
Mark Davies and Andy Missan signed each other's severance agreements on September 10, while Automattic founder Matt Mullenweg was briefly removed as chief executive. TechCrunch
The board voted on September 9 to place Mullenweg on paid leave. Davies served as interim CEO during that window. Mullenweg returned about 33 hours later.
The signatures were reciprocal. Davies signed Missan's agreement, and Missan signed Davies's. Both are dated September 10, when Davies held interim authority.
Each agreement uses the same terms. It offers 12 months of base salary paid as a lump sum, equity that vests early, meaning stock awards become available ahead of schedule, the right to exercise vested stock options, meaning the right to buy shares already earned, and an additional year of health coverage. Together, the two deals total $8.15 million in accelerated equity plus a year of salary.
Mullenweg dismissed Davies and Missan after returning as CEO. Those dismissals activated the agreements signed the day before. TechCrunch based its reporting on severance documents it reviewed. The board members who voted for the leave have since left Automattic.
The short ouster followed a longer dispute. In 2024, Mullenweg told employees who disagreed with him to leave with severance. After the September 9 vote, he said directors had conspired against him. Inc. He then told staff in Slack that he was back in control. TechCrunch
For senior executives, severance is normally approved by the board or a compensation committee. The chief executive and the legal chief are normally kept separate from approval of their own awards.
In my view, the signing arrangement here deserves close attention from anyone who sets rules for leadership changes. A 33-hour window is short, yet it produced binding commitments with multi-million dollar equity effects. The open questions are how signing authority was assigned during the leave, who was supposed to review deals involving the decision makers themselves, and whether interim power was meant to cover the interim leader's own pay.
The broader context here is how well company procedures hold up when decisions must be made fast. Leadership changes shorten timelines and concentrate power. Companies that get through them with fewer lasting problems usually put clear limits on what an interim leader can approve, especially for pay, early equity payouts and post-employment benefits. Without those limits, a temporary role can create lasting obligations, as happened when the dismissals triggered the September 10 agreements. Automattic now has its chief executive back, and it will need to restore normal routines for finance, legal review and personnel decisions to keep its products and infrastructure running steadily.
