exactly; I think it would be worthwhile to help startups get away from that default thinking, and sooner get started on what they will eventually want to do once they realize it's part of the game / shouldn't be ignored. It's just about getting them to not suffer the damage of being late to the game that they will inevitably need to play if they get serious
I don't think it should be about skipping the (or one of) the hard parts. It should be about guidance through it and helping founders understand how to read the signals coming in. Some startups think they're doing it, but they're really not.
A service to push founders through it would be great.
I’m interested in hearing your thoughts on overstating what you can learn in a startup. From my (potentially naive) pov, you get more hands on experience and less problems are abstracted away whether it is through infrastructure, processes or whatever and also the work (might?) be more important for the company to remain alive so I’d imagine you’d have to get a better understanding faster in order to keep up?
Yes, absolutely, I think that's a part of the success of startups, possibly any new company. The participants fully know, understand and believe in the company's products and vision,
The problem is if you're at a startup you probably don't know what your product is, because you don't know who your customers are.
My last startup died because we committed too hard to the product and the business model, which while innovative and one that I still believe could have succeeded - we utterly failed because we didn't understand our customers and we didn't pivot fast enough, ran out of runway and then everyone but the founders got laid off. Waiting on hearing about the equity.
I just wonder how many founders and co-founder fail to understand the crucial value proposition of their business. I suspect one attribute of successful start ups is that over time they come to understand that aspect. And perhaps when we hear of startups "pivoting" that is not the result of a though process but instead a forehead slapping "why didn't I see that?" moment.
Yeah completely agree. As a startup founder, I know what I am good at. I also know that it isn't yet the time to bring the 'mainstream management' on board. I have to eliminate the risk and create a business based on some defensive position and repeatable customer sales proposition.
In short take us somewhere unambiguous to then hand the reins over.
Very true indeed. There's an adage in the startup world that says you should try to solve a pain you suffer yourself - that's what you understand best. It's true. Unfortunately though, while startups are mostly made up of young, middle-class males, that won't include many problems you only really start to understand once you've got a good grasp of the enterprise world and the challenges there that haven't been addressed yet.
I run a pitch-creation service (pitchremix.com) and have definitely noticed this. Many founders don't know how to communicate what their startup does in clear, concise language. They may be building a super-complex world-changing technology, but no one knows (or cares) because it's hidden behind a wall of stream-of-consciousness gibberish. A little structure goes a long way.
+1. Maybe this is more important at a big company that at a startup where your business model and your tech is either good enough or it isn't. But even then you still have backers, etc.
Some people understand this stuff, and some people don't, and I don't see a lot of ways for someone who doesn't get it to become someone who gets it.
reply