Abstract: Crowdfunding has become an attractive option to raise funds in recent years. Several studies have examined language use in crowdfunding campaigns, and a few have attempted to understand entrepreneurs’ language use on these platforms precisely. All assume that those categorized as entrepreneurial are inherently different from those categorized as other. We aim to explore […]
“You’re building a great product—but a product isn’t a company.”
Have you ever heard this after delivering your startup pitch? What does it mean?
As an angel investor, I know I’ve given this feedback more than once after listening to pitches for cool products—but products that didn’t have a chance in hell of supporting a company.
Ray Kroc. Steve Jobs. Evan Williams.
These powerhouse entrepreneurs have one thing in common—persistence.
Kroc relentlessly built the McDonald’s restaurant chain throughout both America and the world, in spite of stiff opposition from his own business partners.
Jobs epitomized the spirit of not giving up when he rejoined Apple as its CEO—after suffering the humiliation of being fired from that same iconic company that he co-founded years before.
You may know Willams from his work as a co-founder of Twitter. Or as the visionary leader of Medium.
But, Williams’s entrepreneurial journey started well before either of those companies.
Virtually every company leader will say they believe continuous improvement and being a “learning organization” are requirements to stay competitive. But, do leaders act on this belief—or is this just what one says in polite company?
In their 2015 article, “Why organizations don’t learn,” Francesca Gino and Bradley Staats explain how “biases cause people to focus too much on success, take action too quickly, try too hard to fit in, and depend too much on experts.”
The authors break down the reasons for these biases and recommend specific changes leaders can make in their organizations to mitigate against them.
There is an ongoing debate about whether investors should bet on the jockey or the horse, i.e., the founders’ abilities to succeed or the quality of the entrepreneurial opportunities pursued. There is no doubt, though, that high-quality opportunities are an important ingredient contributing to startup success, particularly when they revolve around technological innovations.
But, how do entrepreneurs discover opportunities? Scott Shane, in his 2000 article, “Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities,” studies eight different companies that launched in an effort to exploit the 3DP™ process in different ways. Shane’s research shows “entrepreneurs discover opportunities related to the information that they already possess” and those discoveries are immediate epiphanies—not the result of systematic search and evaluation.
Human cognition research suggests that we are not a totally rational species: Thinking errors and biases are part of the human condition. Baron’s 1998 article explores how entrepreneurs think differently from non-entrepreneurs and how these differences could lead to an increased susceptibility to certain thinking errors and biases. He then examines five specific thinking errors and their relevance to entrepreneurs.
Humans are riddled with thinking biases. We rely on two different cognitive systems for decision making. System 1 thinking relies on intuition, whereas System 2 uses rational, deliberate reasoning. Unfortunately, both systems are imperfect and wrought with thinking biases that can lead to poor decision making. Soll, Milkman, and Payne, in their 2015 article, provide an assortment of methods to help managers identify and overcome some of the most common decision-making traps.
Bhide’s paper presents a strategic framework for entrepreneurs based on asking themselves three questions to clarify the goals for their business, pick the right strategies to achieve those goals, and importantly, determine if they can successfully execute those strategies. The framework doesn’t prescribe answers, but instead, “helps entrepreneurs pose useful questions, identify important issues, and evaluate solutions.”
Sixty-three percent of Americans desire self-employment. So what’s stopping them? And, are those who work for themselves really more satisfied than those working for others? In their 1998 article, “What makes an entrepreneur?” Blanchflower and Oswald analyzed data gathered from the United States and other industrialized countries, uncovering answers to these fundamental questions about who becomes an entrepreneur.
The authors’ analysis answers timeless questions still relevant to today’s aspiring entrepreneurs.