Automattic, the company behind WordPress and several other digital products, experienced a dramatic boardroom reversal this month when its board temporarily removed CEO Matt Mullenweg before reinstating him less than two days later. The company disclosed the initial departure on Thursday, with CFO Mark Davies assuming the role temporarily. By Saturday, Mullenweg had returned to his position after what the company characterized as 33 hours and 20 minutes away.
Mullenweg co-founded WordPress in 2003 and established Automattic in 2005. The company operates multiple products under its umbrella, including Tumblr, WooCommerce, and Beeper, alongside the WordPress platform itself. Despite the rapid reversal, Automattic has remained silent on what prompted the initial decision or the circumstances that led to Mullenweg's return.
Board backing and internal support
Automattic's director of communications Megan Fox stated that "Matt Mullenweg is the chairman and CEO of Automattic, with full support of the board." Internal communications from Mullenweg himself, shared in Slack messages, indicated that "the board is back in agreement, and I'm in control of Automattic."
Mullenweg acknowledged the turbulent period in his message, saying "A lot happened in the past 48 hours that we need to sort out, and I hope much of it was a misunderstanding, because I have huge respect and regard for those involved." Multiple executives and employees have publicly expressed support for the CEO.
Governance and uncertainty concerns
Roman Milyushkevich, CEO and CTO at HasData, cautioned against drawing firm conclusions about what transpired. While the sequence of events resembles a failed boardroom coup, Milyushkevich told The New Stack that "I would not call it a coup as an established fact." He outlined several possible explanations for the reversal: a new board agreement negotiated during the 33-hour window, internal or external negotiations, directors reconsidering the practical implications of removing the founder, or an undisclosed internal resolution.
Milyushkevich emphasized that the critical issue facing Automattic is not determining who prevailed in the dispute, but rather establishing clear governance procedures. He stressed that "the most important thing Automattic can establish now is not who won the dispute, but whether the board and CEO have a clearly understood process for handling the next serious disagreement."
Ricardo D'Olivar, a behavioral scientist and visiting professor at São Paulo's FIA Business School, highlighted the broader implications of the reversal. According to D'Olivar, the key question is whether stakeholders possess "enough information to distinguish a considered correction from an unresolved struggle" over authority. A reinstatement alone does not clarify how future disagreements would be resolved.
D'Olivar warned that persistent uncertainty could have tangible consequences. Employees may become reluctant to commit fully to decisions if organizational support appears unstable. Prospective executives and developers might question whether they would face accountability for authorized decisions that the organization later fails to defend. Investors may demand stronger evidence that governance and succession planning can withstand pressure.
Historical precedent for CEO returns
Mullenweg's rapid departure and return follows a pattern seen elsewhere in technology leadership. Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, departed the board following a communication disagreement, but returned to his position five days later after nearly all of the company's 700+ staff threatened to resign and Microsoft applied additional pressure.
Other notable examples include Steve Jobs, who was ousted from Apple in 1985 and returned 12 years later to lead the company through its most successful period. Jack Dorsey, founder of Twitter, was removed in 2008 and returned in 2015. Michael Dell stepped down as CEO to become chairman in 2004, resuming the CEO role by early 2007.
Whether Automattic's situation represents a routine boardroom adjustment or a more serious governance crisis remains unclear. The company has not disclosed the underlying causes, leaving observers to speculate about what unfolds next for the WordPress ecosystem.