Symptoms of Successful Entrepreneurs(chrysbader.com)
chrysbader.com
Symptoms of Successful Entrepreneurs
http://chrysbader.com/the-symptoms-of-a-successful-entrepreneur
7 comments
I think some cultures might not appreciate entrepreneurs as much as other cultures. This may lead to family pressure which may in turn lead to students seeing big companies like Google and Microsoft as the ceiling of success. In contrast they might see entrepreneurs as risk takers, who aren't thinking about their family. I'm saying all this because I've observed that the ratio of races in computer science is extremely difference from the ratio among entrepreneurs.
I once chatted about how Americans live up to the American dream while in other countries there is no such thing, you go to school and become another cog in the machine.
Entrepreneurship is frowned upon by some cultures- my family have are very much working class, my father and his father were both proud union men. Anything else wouldn't be encouraged
Entrepreneurship is frowned upon by some cultures- my family have are very much working class, my father and his father were both proud union men. Anything else wouldn't be encouraged
So the model for people within organizations is that Success = Ability * Motivation * Opportunity.
For entrepreneurs, I would argue that Success = Ability * Motivation * Opportunity * 'Normal'
What do I mean?
'Normal' is the most powerful human emotion. We just don't notice it because it's usually invisible. Let me give you an example. I only like being in romantic relationships where both people have equal power. If I have more power than the other person then it's cognitively draining because I always have to plan everything and make sure I'm not accidentally taking advantage of the other person or something, whereas if I have less power then I hate being dicked around. The reason I have this preference is probably because that's how my parents are, so that's what feels 'normal' to me. Any deviation from this and it's extremely uncomfortable, so the relationship quickly falls apart. For people who come from families with an abusive parent, they often prefer relationships where one person has vastly more power than the other, because that's what 'normal' is to them.
What feels normal to someone is an extremely important predictor of success, because any time we deviate from normal in any area of life we get very uncomfortable very quickly.
Examples of situations where there's a 'normal': balance of power in any relationship (business, mentoring, romantic), how you spend your day, how many people are in your network, your body language, how many books you read, etc.
To be an entrepreneur your level of 'normal' has to be just right for dozens of different variables, but most people come from families and backgrounds where their needle is just in the wrong place in at least some areas. And the problem is that it's extremely difficult to move someone's needle. Even for someone who comes from a great background, it can still take going through a program like YC or even one much more intensive in order to get a person's needles set in the positions they need to be in to achieve greatness. And for someone from a less good background, it can take literally years.
So the thing is, you can be really great at school just by memorizing stuff in books. But to get to that next level there is usually at some additional inner work that needs to be done, which most people don't even realize. Just look at how Steve Jobs spent his youth. That's kind of an extreme example, but after talking with a lot of entrepreneurs I've noticed this general pattern running across a lot of the success stories.
For entrepreneurs, I would argue that Success = Ability * Motivation * Opportunity * 'Normal'
What do I mean?
'Normal' is the most powerful human emotion. We just don't notice it because it's usually invisible. Let me give you an example. I only like being in romantic relationships where both people have equal power. If I have more power than the other person then it's cognitively draining because I always have to plan everything and make sure I'm not accidentally taking advantage of the other person or something, whereas if I have less power then I hate being dicked around. The reason I have this preference is probably because that's how my parents are, so that's what feels 'normal' to me. Any deviation from this and it's extremely uncomfortable, so the relationship quickly falls apart. For people who come from families with an abusive parent, they often prefer relationships where one person has vastly more power than the other, because that's what 'normal' is to them.
What feels normal to someone is an extremely important predictor of success, because any time we deviate from normal in any area of life we get very uncomfortable very quickly.
Examples of situations where there's a 'normal': balance of power in any relationship (business, mentoring, romantic), how you spend your day, how many people are in your network, your body language, how many books you read, etc.
To be an entrepreneur your level of 'normal' has to be just right for dozens of different variables, but most people come from families and backgrounds where their needle is just in the wrong place in at least some areas. And the problem is that it's extremely difficult to move someone's needle. Even for someone who comes from a great background, it can still take going through a program like YC or even one much more intensive in order to get a person's needles set in the positions they need to be in to achieve greatness. And for someone from a less good background, it can take literally years.
So the thing is, you can be really great at school just by memorizing stuff in books. But to get to that next level there is usually at some additional inner work that needs to be done, which most people don't even realize. Just look at how Steve Jobs spent his youth. That's kind of an extreme example, but after talking with a lot of entrepreneurs I've noticed this general pattern running across a lot of the success stories.
Depends what you mean by entrepreneurs. I know a vast flock of people who all formed bands in high school, recorded albums, toured. Some of our classical musicians were playing at local concert halls while in high school. Artists looked for exhibitions and writers looked for magazine publications.
You can separate people into three groups: People creating things, people who don't want to create things, and people who are content to go where they're taken. I have some friends who are really just happier preparing for work in business or in politics, rising ranks, living outside their work. I myself fall into neither category: I'm satisfied to drift. Thus far I haven't been prompted to pick a side, and I see merits for each.
Today's world is more entrepreneurial than the world of a decade ago was, but I think you'll find it becomes less and less overt and more a part of natural life. I launched two web sites yesterday, for instance, and both will be seeking an audience; ten years ago that might have been a sign of entrepreneurialism, but now the cost of launching a web site is so nonexistent that it's just part of a day's work.
You can separate people into three groups: People creating things, people who don't want to create things, and people who are content to go where they're taken. I have some friends who are really just happier preparing for work in business or in politics, rising ranks, living outside their work. I myself fall into neither category: I'm satisfied to drift. Thus far I haven't been prompted to pick a side, and I see merits for each.
Today's world is more entrepreneurial than the world of a decade ago was, but I think you'll find it becomes less and less overt and more a part of natural life. I launched two web sites yesterday, for instance, and both will be seeking an audience; ten years ago that might have been a sign of entrepreneurialism, but now the cost of launching a web site is so nonexistent that it's just part of a day's work.
The second "Successful entrepreneurs move in packs" might be a product of the YC experience. It is a known fact that tech entrepreneurship is a lonely endeavour - not many people understand or care about what you're doing. Having a whole bunch of people with the same passion that are roughly at the same stage as you will inevitably tend to create a "wolfpack" trying to conquer the world.
But whether this is a trait of a successful entrepreneur is not so clear. I'm not saying it isn't so, just that the poster could be biased by the YC wolfpack experience. Janus Friis and Niklas Zennstrom, for instance, weren't wellconnected when they started out with Kazaa and in the early days of Skype. I have several friends that are lone wolf entrepreneurs, and don't have many close friends or business associates in the strartup world. And some of them are very succesful.
But whether this is a trait of a successful entrepreneur is not so clear. I'm not saying it isn't so, just that the poster could be biased by the YC wolfpack experience. Janus Friis and Niklas Zennstrom, for instance, weren't wellconnected when they started out with Kazaa and in the early days of Skype. I have several friends that are lone wolf entrepreneurs, and don't have many close friends or business associates in the strartup world. And some of them are very succesful.
It might also be a function of being in the Valley. Everyone seems to know each other here.
I think it certainly is. That's probably why there are startup hubs. My argument was more that connectedness to other entrepreneurs probably isn't one of the three most defining characters of succesful entrepreneurs.
I would counter-argue that it is a trait of successful entrepreneurs that they would be successful whether they did it alone or as part of a group.
While I don't agree, I'll admit that you may be right, but this is impossible to know.
But why make all the same mistakes? Why have to figure it all out on your own? Why reinvent every wheel that's already been built and can't get any more round? Why wouldn't you want a group of folks who will always give you the most critical feedback, but who will also sell you to potential customers, investors, and partners like no one else could? Trust me, your friends who haven't done this, can't help you nearly as much as your friends who are doing it right now. Sure, you can still be successful, and many have without organized seed programs around them, but why not take every advantage you can get?
But why make all the same mistakes? Why have to figure it all out on your own? Why reinvent every wheel that's already been built and can't get any more round? Why wouldn't you want a group of folks who will always give you the most critical feedback, but who will also sell you to potential customers, investors, and partners like no one else could? Trust me, your friends who haven't done this, can't help you nearly as much as your friends who are doing it right now. Sure, you can still be successful, and many have without organized seed programs around them, but why not take every advantage you can get?
There are myriad ways of measuring success, both entrepreneurially and otherwise. Your method is one approach, but there are others. Many of the entrepreneurs of former decades and centuries became successful not by asking their entrepreneur buddies for their opinions over beers, but by being persistent and shrewd.
Where you see comfort in others' advice, I see the dangers of falling into the same patterns as them. This is a widespread problem right now in several fields, not just entrepreneurship: there seems to be a cultural movement towards reading others' opinions and following others' advice in the name of not reinventing the wheel, versus solving the problem on your own.
The trouble with this is that there are lots of problems which can be solved through more than one unique approach, so in doing it the same way as everyone else, you're losing out on the opportunity to differentiate.
Where you see comfort in others' advice, I see the dangers of falling into the same patterns as them. This is a widespread problem right now in several fields, not just entrepreneurship: there seems to be a cultural movement towards reading others' opinions and following others' advice in the name of not reinventing the wheel, versus solving the problem on your own.
The trouble with this is that there are lots of problems which can be solved through more than one unique approach, so in doing it the same way as everyone else, you're losing out on the opportunity to differentiate.
Interestingly enough, many of the folks I met remarked that they had 1. mentors who helped them get their first, second, nth company off the ground deal with problems, and just plain succeed, and 2. had sought out others doing the same thing. Oh, and these are folks who are the entrepreneurs of the last couple of decades. Guess what, they are the investors and mentors of today. Regarding the feedback of other startup folks, this isn't about going it your own way, far from it, it's about the things that are similar that are a waste of your most value resource - time, the contact you don't have and the intros that can be made, the things you haven't seen that can sink you, but aren't what make your business your business. Why waste time on that crap?
this is also a case of correlation does not imply causation. People who fall out of touch may have done so because things are not going well as opposed to being the cause of things not going so well.
Am I the only one who thinks articles like this are pure fluff? tl;dr -
"Successful people (like me) try real hard."
"Successful people (like me) hang out in my elite San Francisco pack of friends."
"Successful people (like me) have sparks in their eyes, but not stars."
this is not news or hacking, it's ego stroking. /flameoff
"Successful people (like me) try real hard."
"Successful people (like me) hang out in my elite San Francisco pack of friends."
"Successful people (like me) have sparks in their eyes, but not stars."
this is not news or hacking, it's ego stroking. /flameoff
It's not news, or hacking, but something that's as important to the success of a startup - the startup life. It's an acknowledgment, or maybe an admission that doing this is hard, that there are definite commonalities among those who pull it off, that it's easier to go it with a community around you.
Running a startup, creating a startup, living a startup is freakin hard. I've done it multiple times before my trip through TechStars, and man, now that I've experienced (and continue to experience it, as not a day goes by that I don't talk to at least one other founder, a mentor, or an advisor) this way, I'm sold and happy I'll never have to go it alone again.
He sees it too. I hope for your benefit that if you're doing this, if you're trying to really start something (not just read YC) that you seek out others who are doing the same. It could mean the difference between your success or failure.
Running a startup, creating a startup, living a startup is freakin hard. I've done it multiple times before my trip through TechStars, and man, now that I've experienced (and continue to experience it, as not a day goes by that I don't talk to at least one other founder, a mentor, or an advisor) this way, I'm sold and happy I'll never have to go it alone again.
He sees it too. I hope for your benefit that if you're doing this, if you're trying to really start something (not just read YC) that you seek out others who are doing the same. It could mean the difference between your success or failure.
Sounds like you both are sipping from the same giant pot of kool-aid.
Seriously, "the startup life"? A startup's success or failure rides on associating with the trendy crowd?
Blech, let's get back to writing a lot of good code and listening to user feedback.
Seriously, "the startup life"? A startup's success or failure rides on associating with the trendy crowd?
Blech, let's get back to writing a lot of good code and listening to user feedback.
You're drawing conclusions where they don't exist.
The "startup life", the life of a startup founder is in fact, hard. Building a product is hard. Building a company is hard. Building anything of value is hard. It has nothing to do with a trendy crowd or a decidedly non-trendy crowd, it has entirely to do with folks who are having, have recently, or will have a lot of the same challenges as you. I'm not sure why it's hard to understand having friends who've been there, done that, or are doing it is very, very helpful. I'm glad you're able to do it all on your own, but some of us either aren't, or have realized it's a waste of time to. Being a martyr will help you much less than having the smarts to ask folks who can help you not waste time on the things that don't actually move your business forward, but can only impede progress - there's your value. Man, this kool aid is yummy ... it tastes like improving my odds ... and that tastes great!
The "startup life", the life of a startup founder is in fact, hard. Building a product is hard. Building a company is hard. Building anything of value is hard. It has nothing to do with a trendy crowd or a decidedly non-trendy crowd, it has entirely to do with folks who are having, have recently, or will have a lot of the same challenges as you. I'm not sure why it's hard to understand having friends who've been there, done that, or are doing it is very, very helpful. I'm glad you're able to do it all on your own, but some of us either aren't, or have realized it's a waste of time to. Being a martyr will help you much less than having the smarts to ask folks who can help you not waste time on the things that don't actually move your business forward, but can only impede progress - there's your value. Man, this kool aid is yummy ... it tastes like improving my odds ... and that tastes great!
This is a great example of how the comments on HN are often more useful than the articles themselves. Thanks, everyone.
The startups that are still alive are the ones who remained in touch.
Causation runs both ways on this one. It's a lot more fun to hang out with other entrepreneurs when your own startup is kicking ass---and a lot less fun when it's dying. When your startup is struggling, hearing other entrepreneurs talk about how great things are going is like being in a dead-end marriage and hearing other couples talk about how madly in love they are.
Causation runs both ways on this one. It's a lot more fun to hang out with other entrepreneurs when your own startup is kicking ass---and a lot less fun when it's dying. When your startup is struggling, hearing other entrepreneurs talk about how great things are going is like being in a dead-end marriage and hearing other couples talk about how madly in love they are.
I don't know about that. I've got a small network of friends still in school doing two different startups, and I enjoy talking to him about how its going, even though they are currently much more successful than I am (I wimped out and took a 9-5 to pay off the student loans).
Alright you have listed the symptoms ... do you have any ideas as to the cure?
It raises an interesting question: why don't more students become entrepreneurs? It's either (A) these skills don't transfer well in practice or (B) a question of motivation and confidence. I'm inclined to believe (B), and I think PG has addressed this in "A Students Guide to Startups".
http://paulgraham.com/mit.html